Failsafe Licence LGPL / GPL confusion
Kashif Shaikh <[email protected]> Fri, 28 Nov 2003 12:20:49 -0500
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.failsafe |
|---|---|
| Organization | Consensys Computers Inc. |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Hello everyone, I know this list is not hardly used by anyone, but I was wondering if someone from SGI or SuSE can answer my question: Most of the header files in FailSafe/cluster_services/include/ are LGPL, which permits proprietary add-ons to use the underlying CHOAS libraries(cms/gcs/srm). However, some of the header files are confusing: For example, FailSafe/cluster_services/include/ci_config.h is LGPL, but the header files it includes(i.e. cdb.h) are GPL only. Won't this contaminate proprietary add-ons? In this case ci_config.h should be labeled as GPL, and not LGPL. Or perhaps the cdb library should be marked as LGPL(can only be done by copyright owners i.e. SGI). I'm not arguing if a library should be GPL or LGPL, I'm just saying the license application should be made clearer, so people like me can evaluate failsafe v.s. heartbeat(it's API is consistently LGPL). I can't make the headers more clearer, because it depends on what the copyright owners want to LGPL. So the balls in your court, I just need objective information. Kashif