From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7FEE9CDB47E for ; Wed, 18 Oct 2023 13:20:08 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=fuzziesquirrel.com header.i=@fuzziesquirrel.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm1 header.b=jkNu/csY; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm3 header.b=MwS4bjMN; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4S9Wfv0pvsz3cC9 for ; Thu, 19 Oct 2023 00:20:07 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=fuzziesquirrel.com header.i=@fuzziesquirrel.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm1 header.b=jkNu/csY; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm3 header.b=MwS4bjMN; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=fuzziesquirrel.com (client-ip=66.111.4.26; helo=out2-smtp.messagingengine.com; envelope-from=bradleyb@fuzziesquirrel.com; receiver=lists.ozlabs.org) Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4S9Wdk72WYz3bVS for ; Thu, 19 Oct 2023 00:19:05 +1100 (AEDT) Received: from compute6.internal (compute6.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5B465C0329; Wed, 18 Oct 2023 09:19:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute6.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 18 Oct 2023 09:19:01 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= fuzziesquirrel.com; h=cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:sender :subject:subject:to:to; s=fm1; t=1697635141; x=1697721541; bh=/x CM8wBn4GVT3ZuNIm3knqAsQ/INpqZ+SDjf44rjrEA=; b=jkNu/csYJRtfgpyeL1 Y2iOMGPylEX5CgbYOF6gtsC24Q7QMhDi8qMCj+fHk9mH05H93J7R1RE0xhynU0iP nOUU5c7MzMqkw+0oEIhQR8HBLUwPJq9ahGPrP+4UKdOqxAC4p2Dr2jR4I5+0cLWF RXNdlMoTVxTWB+bVmWj1m5xPszYZ8XjnxTOulmxOatJ5i7W4+T/ZyO08yCd/Pl5w +QKI8Wg+KBd7VwY2BKcwvBBvH9yiUSLDGq08Wenk+l6ND2tmYE2sMtVBGaFfqQYa YWbSVRO5vAged5vtLKVNU3lJXDEKb9R4B2dN3MpSOraHpVStg5Se4dpnI77a39fK y6fA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:content-type:date:date:feedback-id:feedback-id :from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; t= 1697635141; x=1697721541; bh=/xCM8wBn4GVT3ZuNIm3knqAsQ/INpqZ+SDj f44rjrEA=; b=MwS4bjMNHlXdiiw/xnhHHEv0IHd72sKtc5vyKjG9+jOJ+ynq+sp 4bt0GB8Ym/WOAj+MwSmf9JWTVIp7ghYeNeD5umlYxtGH56keWWYBywbZVzCceW5M zDnwhr+AnC0QopUPIcpnO+wywBTm4wy9yZBizYji0w6jB4GiUJWQCyHroQhTucr3 zrrjcXIVg+QV+X7Y3RC2mv4u/mt/ZDc/6GfhDzubTRCa1+bTsYoigIpwPKt8lRQa WB/2kR+7DkZqqs4bHm9sxTwc9Ch7P/flkxViQ3Es3jrv61j+p0A8zs22W7iQjSYK uuh2dZQiVEoPNFw2alz12Tjq5iCEXzTBCdA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvkedrjeeggdeiudcutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpeffhffvvefukfhfgggtugfgjgestheksfdttddtudenucfhrhhomhepuehrrggu uceuihhshhhophcuoegsrhgrughlvgihsgesfhhuiiiiihgvshhquhhirhhrvghlrdgtoh hmqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpeeikeeuteffveefgefhleeigfeutdetieevgeejgfej gfejffeuhedugfduffegteenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmh grihhlfhhrohhmpegsrhgrughlvgihsgesfhhuiiiiihgvshhquhhirhhrvghlrdgtohhm X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i02c9470a:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Wed, 18 Oct 2023 09:19:00 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2023 09:18:58 -0400 From: Brad Bishop To: Sunitha Harish Subject: Re: D-bus model proposal for pay for access features - LicenseService at OpenBMC Message-ID: <7xefpmuelqu2nv6iwkpaqqgeomdp7ru4uywejmqudeao7f5rbl@hqnhwttquefv> References: <20210504233843.hvuvmebaznanqnlv@thinkpad.fuzziesquirrel.com> <0af0324d-c8a1-4ce8-80c3-f8f846cc930f@gmail.com> <2736a0cbaf79f00617a8e55a962eea505ac7a7ab.camel@codeconstruct.com.au> <0a4277122b61695d802c25d089533d1bdefe64a8.camel@codeconstruct.com.au> <762c3491-93df-4ac4-9a44-a3fb1b448936@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <762c3491-93df-4ac4-9a44-a3fb1b448936@gmail.com> X-BeenThere: openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Development list for OpenBMC List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: raviteja28031990@gmail.com, Ratan Gupta , OpenBMC Maillist , Ed Tanous , abhilash.kollam@gmail.com Errors-To: openbmc-bounces+openbmc=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "openbmc" On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 12:51:47PM +0530, Sunitha Harish wrote: > >On 13-10-2023 21:33, Brad Bishop wrote: >>On Fri, Oct 13, 2023 at 05:04:23PM +1030, Andrew Jeffery wrote: >>>However, there is an escape hatch for project social issues. For >>>example interested parties might choose to collaborate on the license >>>manager implementation outside of the OpenBMC org, and package it >>>through Yocto or OpenEmbedded. >> >>I've been thinking along similar lines lately and I like this idea.  >>For a license server and even in general I think less centralized >>control and less tightly coupled software would be a good direction >>to take. >I am not very clear about this. The control and processing of the >license will not be in BMC scope. The host should manage it. The suggestion here is to: 1 - write your license server application 2 - throw it up on Github somewhere other than openbmc 3 - submit a recipe to meta-oe It's possible the meta-oe maintainers could reject your recipe for the same reasons as you've been rejected here (or any other variety of reasons). In that case you could just make a meta layer with a single recipe and throw that up on github too. The downside to this approach is you shouldn't use projects like phosphor-logging, sdbusplus, or phosphor-dbus-interfaces or any other recipes that are provided by OpenBMC or in meta-phosphor. Certainly not if you want to get a recipe into meta-oe. IMO this isn't necessarily a bad thing, though. This is what I meant by tightly coupled software - if you take this approach and avoid OpenBMC specific frameworks...who knows - if you make a an really awesome, useful piece of software - you might even get collaborators from outside OpenBMC.