[dev] Conditions to have code accepted into the project

[Albert López]

Thank you every one for your comments. I see that legal part of the 
problem is more complex that the technical one. We need to study in more 
detail the possible options to make our code compatible with GPLv2. If 
we find an acceptable option, we will come back to you to validate the 
option as feasible.

Best regards

Albert López


On 10/1/19 17:14, JR Rivers wrote:
>
> On licensing, all submissions need to be GPLv2 because it virally 
> inherits GPL as soon as you include any macros, data structures, CLI 
> infrastructure, etc.  We are currently working on getting all of that 
> under control for the project, so current state is not a refection of 
> what needs to happen.
>
> To be extremely precise, if you are able to completely separate the 
> "core" of your function away from the code that interacts with the 
> rest of FRR, then you can keep your core as Apache-2 and only have the 
> "adaptation" be GPL.  With that said, each time this approach is 
> studied, it become extremely complicated.
>
> Additionally, you can keep your project elsewhere as Apache and pull 
> it into FRR (always "forward merging"), which means that any bug 
> fixes, enhancements, etc that are proposed in FRR need to be 
> separately done in your Apache repo and then pull into FRR.  Here is a 
> pretty good reference if you decide to take this path...
>
> https://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2007/gpl-non-gpl-collaboration.html
>
> This has an opportunity of getting into a long email discussion, so if 
> you'd like to discuss more, perhaps a phone/video call would be best.
>
> cheers, JR
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 5:13 AM Renato Westphal 
> <renato at opensourcerouting.org <mailto:renato at opensourcerouting.org>> 
> wrote:
>
>     Exciting news, a LISP implementation in FRR would be amazing!
>
>     Regarding your questions, here are my two cents:
>     * FRR's CLI and zclient code are tightly coupled to the FRR event loop
>     (lib/thread.[ch]), and this essentially makes it impossible for a
>     daemon to use a different event loop. ldpd and nhrpd used libevent and
>     libev, respectively, and both had to be converted to use FRR's event
>     library.
>     * Not using FRR's memory management should be fine (ldpd doesn't use
>     it for instance, and other daemons use it only partially).
>     * Our documentation says the Apache 2.0 and GPLv2 licenses are
>     incompatible [1] unfortunately. Maybe JR and David can provide you
>     guidance on how to solve this problem.
>
>     Best Regards,
>     Renato.
>
>     [1]
>     http://docs.frrouting.org/projects/dev-guide/en/latest/workflow.html#license-for-contributions
>
>     On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 10:39 AM Donald Sharp
>     <sharpd at cumulusnetworks.com <mailto:sharpd at cumulusnetworks.com>>
>     wrote:
>     >
>     > Albert -
>     >
>     > If you already have your own infrastructure there is no need to use
>     > ours.  I think the only real requirement is the usage of our ZAPI
>     > protocol for talking to the RIB(zebra).  This is especially true if
>     > there is going to be active ongoing maintenance from your end.
>     >
>     > As for licensing I've added JR and David who are both better than me
>     > on licensing and their implications.  I'll let them speak up.
>     >
>     > donald
>     >
>     > On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 5:31 AM Albert López <alopez at ac.upc.edu
>     <mailto:alopez at ac.upc.edu>> wrote:
>     > >
>     > > Dear all,
>     > >
>     > > We have an implementation of the LISP protocol and we are
>     evaluating how
>     > > easy would be to adapt it to be integrated in the FRRouting
>     project. Our
>     > > initial code has its own memory management, timers (task
>     scheduling),
>     > > ... In order to know how much of the code can be reused, I
>     would like to
>     > > know if it is really mandatory to use the memory management
>     library
>     > > provided by the FRRouting project or the task scheduling (for
>     instance
>     > > to send periodic control messages) to have the code accepted
>     and merged
>     > > in the FRRRouting project.
>     > >
>     > > Another question we have is that our code is licensed under
>     Apache 2. Is
>     > > FRRouting license compatible with apache 2 ? I believe yes but
>     I am not
>     > > sure.
>     > >
>     > > Best regards
>     > >
>     > > Albert López
>     > >
>     > >
>     > > _______________________________________________
>     > > dev mailing list
>     > > dev at lists.frrouting.org <mailto:dev at lists.frrouting.org>
>     > > https://lists.frrouting.org/listinfo/dev
>     >
>     > _______________________________________________
>     > dev mailing list
>     > dev at lists.frrouting.org <mailto:dev at lists.frrouting.org>
>     > https://lists.frrouting.org/listinfo/dev
>
>
>
>     -- 
>     Renato Westphal
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.frrouting.org/pipermail/dev/attachments/20190111/536a84dd/attachment-0001.html>