From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/81 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: rich felker Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: Weekly reports - X Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2011 17:13:42 -0400 Message-ID: References: <4DF12B1D.7050106@gmail.com> <20110613021130.GA21268@openwall.com> <20110613022221.GO191@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <4E079F22.1070901@gmail.com> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=000e0cd75494c8c6d804a6a3e8fc X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1309129674 2804 80.91.229.12 (26 Jun 2011 23:07:54 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2011 23:07:54 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-165-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Mon Jun 27 01:07:47 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@lo.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by lo.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QayQa-0003xL-RW for gllmg-musl@lo.gmane.org; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 01:07:44 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 7244 invoked by uid 550); 26 Jun 2011 23:07:44 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 18060 invoked from network); 26 Jun 2011 21:13:54 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=enbveKPgu2hWqVe+ajNTmN0vCw+69lc2z4ec0gQXjUg=; b=x6E1EN7AtyOBdDIwzbUhlxbqm+TkoQPN+Y8DAyxBWcwc2M5iSvyzlBCPLPo3dpUd2n jzX4D0oTMbWRT1Hjl8vAs0i5FJhOUWcJUrZBfGS5XrWavpxYJ5HFH0a2K+ExnsPrpxMh j3+VfZvOEKw8bqj5lLiJbMH6GAY7nbo4nf/d8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; b=uxPxFTtvHL6aN1mQtxEmp6JgNeQBAqR0Gs7r3Tcs0PTO+KFnBD34mNzhSukECegoSh 46/rUhOdNT0T1PY/TfoF+Zzet54b3hLw2GtPSROWzqRJ2f2haWIWg23VIAIDKL6GQm2I 5O5spv+HzudlGhG0Q/rk12DMAjg3rgwnnhVmM= Original-Sender: rich.felker@gmail.com In-Reply-To: <4E079F22.1070901@gmail.com> X-Google-Sender-Auth: b4k4pgezbPBrMx5de4LENfcpdf8 Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:81 Archived-At: --000e0cd75494c8c6d804a6a3e8fc Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Luka, I would be happy enough with LGPL, but I believe Openwall's commitment to GSoC included terms that all the code developed under their projects would be under BSD license (or equally/more permissive). In any case I don't thin= k the license matters at all for test case code. Anyone who wanted to improve it without releasing their improvements would almost surely be using it for internal use only (testing their implementation), not as a deployed product= , so even if it were GPL they would not be obligated to release anything. Conversely, since it must be in source form to be useful for testing an implementation, even under BSD license, nobody could make a useful closed-source test product out of cluts - the source is essential to using it! Thus I think we should just put aside this bikeshed and BSD it. Rich On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 5:05 PM, Luka Mar=C4=8Deti=C4=87 wrote: > Hi there. > I'm sorry about falling behind so much. Good news though, summer brings m= e > a free window that I'll be able to dedicate to cluts. This next week is t= he > last one that I'll be busy with school until September. Next week, I'll > finish format.c (and perhaps rename it to numerical.c or alike) and fix > alloc.c(arrays instead of lists+implementing your suggestions-keep making > them btw. i appreciate them). Things will finally pick up afterward. > About the license: I've been quiet because I like copyleft. My preferred > license is GPLv3+. But Solar I think said nobody is going to make their o= wn > proprietary version of the library, so why not just make the license > permissive and let them use it however. Perhaps we could compromise and > choose LGPL, the musl's license. I think the reasoning behind that > particular license is clear. > > SUMMARY: 1) Serious work will start a week after this one. 2) How about > LGPL as a compromise? > Thanks. > --Luka M. > --000e0cd75494c8c6d804a6a3e8fc Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Luka,
I would be happy enough with LGPL, but I believe Openw= all's commitment to GSoC included terms that all the code developed und= er their projects would be under BSD license (or equally/more permissive). = In any case I don't think the license matters at all for test case code= . Anyone who wanted to improve it without releasing their improvements woul= d almost surely be using it for internal use only (testing their implementa= tion), not as a deployed product, so even if it were GPL they would not be = obligated to release anything. Conversely, since it must be in source form = to be useful for testing an implementation, even under BSD license, nobody = could make a useful closed-source test product out of cluts - the source is= essential to using it! Thus I think we should just put aside this bikeshed= and BSD it.

Rich




On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 5:05 PM, Luka Mar=C4=8Deti=C4=87= <paxcoder@gmail= .com> wrote:
Hi there.
I'm sorry about falling behind so much. Good news though, summer brings= me a free window that I'll be able to dedicate to cluts. This next wee= k is the last one that I'll be busy with school until September. Next w= eek, I'll finish format.c (and perhaps rename it to numerical.c or alik= e) and fix alloc.c(arrays instead of lists+implementing your suggestions-ke= ep making them btw. i appreciate them). Things will finally pick up afterwa= rd.
About the license: I've been quiet because I like copyleft. My preferre= d license is GPLv3+. But Solar I think said nobody is going to make their o= wn proprietary version of the library, so why not just make the license per= missive and let them use it however. Perhaps we could compromise and choose= LGPL, the musl's license. I think the reasoning behind that particular= license is clear.

SUMMARY: 1) Serious work will start a week after this one. 2) How about LGP= L as a compromise?
Thanks.
--Luka M.

--000e0cd75494c8c6d804a6a3e8fc--