pcp
[Top] [All Lists]

[pcp] PCP Licensing Scheme Problem? (#44)

To: performancecopilot/pcp <pcp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [pcp] PCP Licensing Scheme Problem? (#44)
From: edfsl <notifications@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 05:30:59 -0700
Delivered-to: pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1440505859; bh=xwJ/DJd0DAY9B+OJxEMtzvWk7cfdF4UlX/m2HKkJRt4=; h=From:Reply-To:To:Subject:List-ID:List-Archive:List-Post: List-Unsubscribe:From; b=FNd1XcxSX0Dcxm/G3FPd9jBwSlsgB1WkutEf8Y6jNTkWwZt4g1SZ0Thce7IKgAvCy KG0VMaofVKnCiPzrAWl7qj+R1QNHuWmU9uICChSRWtbXykzC2p+Yz2Tn7fpc7M7ymH dGVlQhIgiLO4rCLXJJ4LrbksAThxCcqoLaW9tQyU=
List-archive: https://github.com/performancecopilot/pcp
List-id: performancecopilot/pcp <pcp.performancecopilot.github.com>
List-post: <mailto:reply+00bd08b669b81830d6e6c26ca5cfa38284571806c36aad4792cf0000000111f4220392a169ce0623d575@reply.github.com>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:unsub+00bd08b669b81830d6e6c26ca5cfa38284571806c36aad4792cf0000000111f4220392a169ce0623d575@reply.github.com>, <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe/AL0ItlIamraXJXVXrCvL0EM5KQ9OR_Awks5orFeDgaJpZM4FxtYZ>
Reply-to: performancecopilot/pcp <reply+00bd08b669b81830d6e6c26ca5cfa38284571806c36aad4792cf0000000111f4220392a169ce0623d575@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

According to the FAQ at http://www.pcp.io/faq.html#Q1b all of the libraries in PCP should be licensed under âVersion 2.1 of the GNU Lesser General Public Licenseâ. However upon a close examination of the source code we have discovered that the library sources contains some code that is tagged as GPL.

Our analysis shows that the PCP libraries are clean for LGPL licensing up until (and including) version 3.5.8-1, at which time it appears that code from other components with a GPL license was brought into the library but the license was not changed. They remained as GPL.

We were wondering if you were aware of this issue and wanted to know if there was a way to clean this up. Would you be willing to change the licensing of the newer GPL code in library to LGPL to resolve the issue and maintain the intent of licensing the libraries under LGPL?

(If there is a better forum/contact to discuss this, please let me know. All emails to pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx are bouncing)


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>