lustre_dlm_flags.h GPLv3 license clarification

lustre_dlm_flags.h GPLv3 license clarification

[George G. Davis]

Greetings,

As recommended in the thread "SPDX-License-Identifier” [1], I would like to followup with the
maintainers of the file drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/include/lustre_dlm_flags.h regarding the GPLv3
license statement contained in that file [2]. Is there an GPLv3 exception clause which can be applied
for this file similar to the bison exception clause or is this file licensed only under GPLv3 only in which
case it would appear to be incompatible with the Linux kernel license [3]?

TIA!

—
Regards,
George

[1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/2/5/65
[2] https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/include/lustre_dlm_flags.h#n9
[3] https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/COPYING

Re: lustre_dlm_flags.h GPLv3 license clarification

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 06:05:24PM -0400, George G. Davis wrote:
> Greetings,
> 
> As recommended in the thread "SPDX-License-Identifier” [1], I would like to followup with the
> maintainers of the file drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/include/lustre_dlm_flags.h regarding the GPLv3
> license statement contained in that file [2]. Is there an GPLv3 exception clause which can be applied
> for this file similar to the bison exception clause or is this file licensed only under GPLv3 only in which
> case it would appear to be incompatible with the Linux kernel license [3]?

Please resend this to the owners of this file (hint, get_maintainers.pl
will get you the list...)

thanks,

greg k-h

Re: lustre_dlm_flags.h GPLv3 license clarification

[George G. Davis]

Hello Greg,

On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 03:31:17PM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 06:05:24PM -0400, George G. Davis wrote:
> > Greetings,
> > 
> > As recommended in the thread "SPDX-License-Identifier” [1], I would like to followup with the
> > maintainers of the file drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/include/lustre_dlm_flags.h regarding the GPLv3
> > license statement contained in that file [2]. Is there an GPLv3 exception clause which can be applied
> > for this file similar to the bison exception clause or is this file licensed only under GPLv3 only in which
> > case it would appear to be incompatible with the Linux kernel license [3]?
> 
> Please resend this to the owners of this file (hint, get_maintainers.pl
> will get you the list...)

Oops, I had an old v3.14.41 based version of get_maintainers.pl checked
out.

I'll resend after using the correct version of get_maintainers.pl.

Thanks!

--
Regards,
George

> 
> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h

Re: lustre_dlm_flags.h GPLv3 license clarification

[George G. Davis]

Hello Oleg,

On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 01:53:35AM +0000, Drokin, Oleg wrote:
> Hello!
> 
> On May 12, 2015, at 6:43 PM, George G. Davis wrote:
> 
> > Greetings,
> > 
> > Resending this using the correct version of get_maintainers.pl.
> > 
> > As recommended in the thread "SPDX-License-Identifier” [1], I would like to followup with the
> > maintainers of the file drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/include/lustre_dlm_flags.h regarding the GPLv3
> > license statement contained in that file [2]. Is there an GPLv3 exception clause which can be applied
> > for this file similar to the bison exception clause or is this file licensed only under GPLv3 only in which
> > case it would appear to be incompatible with the Linux kernel license [3]?
> 
> Duh.
> It appears that the file was automatically generated in the lustre tree with autogen and somebody forgot to
> specify gpl version, so it defaulted to v3:
> [= (gpl "lustre" " * ") =]
> 
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> I think we'll be able to change that to gplv2 easily (to match the rest of Lustre).

Awesome, thanks!  Looking forward to the patch.  : )

--
Regards,
George

> 
> Bye,
>     Oleg

Re: lustre_dlm_flags.h GPLv3 license clarification

[Drokin, Oleg]

Hello!

On May 12, 2015, at 6:43 PM, George G. Davis wrote:

> Greetings,
> 
> Resending this using the correct version of get_maintainers.pl.
> 
> As recommended in the thread "SPDX-License-Identifier” [1], I would like to followup with the
> maintainers of the file drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/include/lustre_dlm_flags.h regarding the GPLv3
> license statement contained in that file [2]. Is there an GPLv3 exception clause which can be applied
> for this file similar to the bison exception clause or is this file licensed only under GPLv3 only in which
> case it would appear to be incompatible with the Linux kernel license [3]?

Duh.
It appears that the file was automatically generated in the lustre tree with autogen and somebody forgot to
specify gpl version, so it defaulted to v3:
[= (gpl "lustre" " * ") =]


Thanks.

I think we'll be able to change that to gplv2 easily (to match the rest of Lustre).

Bye,
    Oleg

lustre_dlm_flags.h GPLv3 license clarification

[George G. Davis]

Greetings,

Resending this using the correct version of get_maintainers.pl.

As recommended in the thread "SPDX-License-Identifier” [1], I would like to followup with the
maintainers of the file drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/include/lustre_dlm_flags.h regarding the GPLv3
license statement contained in that file [2]. Is there an GPLv3 exception clause which can be applied
for this file similar to the bison exception clause or is this file licensed only under GPLv3 only in which
case it would appear to be incompatible with the Linux kernel license [3]?

TIA!

—
Regards,
George

[1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/2/5/65
[2] https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/include/lustre_dlm_flags.h#n9
[3] https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/COPYING