On 2016-11-04 16:38:45 -0700 (-0700), Clint Byrum wrote: [...] > Modules are not plugins. [...] > This only refers to dynamic inventory, which is hardly even a plugin > interface. > > Strategy plugins run in ansible itself and must import pieces of Ansible, > and thus must be GPLv3: [...]
On further reading I mostly concur. Unfamiliarity with Ansible led me to believe they used the terms plug-in and module interchangeably, and I missed that the "strategy" qualifier was key to Michał's original problem statement. Strategy plugins do seem to generally import lots of GPLv3 licensed Python modules from Ansible and call into them, which under conventional wisdom makes the result a derivative work of Ansible that therefore needs to be distributed under a license compatible with GPLv3 (Apache2 would qualify according to the FSF). So presumably as long as the software in question is written from scratch without directly reusing code from existing software under other licenses, it could be distributed under Apache2 (which when combined with Ansible proper leads to a GPLv3 work as the latter provides a superset of the conditions for the former). Depending on who you listen to, this may also mean being careful to only reference Ansible's API documentation and not look at the underlying code or at other similar plug-ins, so as to avoid inadvertently copying some implementation details. Basically I also concur with Steve's evaluation, and hopefully so will the legal-discuss ML. In that case, it boils down to whether the strategy plug-in in question can be written from scratch or for expediency/convenience must be forked from another. If from scratch then it doesn't sound like there's any issue including it in the openstack/kolla repo under one of the OpenStack approved licenses as long as the Kolla team agrees. If a fork of, say, another GPLv3 plug-in then there may be legal reasons for it to belong in a separate repo without ICLA enforcement... though that's something I'd want to hear from lawyers since our contributors agree to the ICLA once as a blanket action, not on a per-repo basis, and there's plenty of software (particularly among unofficial projects) in our Gerrit for which the ICLA is not even remotely applicable. If there's no legal requirement to put it in a separate repo and it can be treated as an aggregation, then it would just be up to the Kolla team to decide whether they also find it acceptable or require some logical separation there for other reasons. -- Jeremy Stanley
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev