> -----Original Message----- > From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com] > Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2013 6:58 PM > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Subject: Re: Regrading support for intel txt > > On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 12:33:21PM +0000, Devdeep Singh wrote: > > The API library and the API documentation are behind an account which > Intel provides. So should we get in touch with legal for this? If yes, who can > help here? > > > > Given this, is it still possible to keep it as a separate profile which is > > disabled > by default if legal permits? > > > > Regards, > > Devdeep > > This is problematic IMO for 2 reasons: > > #1 Community angle: > =================== > > If it's not possible for some to access that library, even if we make it it's > own > build target, then how can anyone test it? On one hand, we place a burden > on ourselves in a similar way for every non-oss dependency. On the other > hand, the fact that we already *sort of* deal with this already might mean > that > the difference is minimal WRT community issues. Have you tried asking Intel > if > they would switch to open publication of the library (not for open sourcing > it, > although that wouldn't suck).
I have reached out to them regarding open publication of the library and am waiting for an answer from them. > > #2 Legal aspects: > ================= > > Any discussion of the legal aspects will start with a copy of the license > itself. > We're stuck without that. We need to understand what we are dealing with > here in the project first, and then we should bring any questions to legal- > discuss@a.o after our initial review. I have asked them for the license text of the library. Waiting to get it from them. Regards, Devdeep > > -chip
