[Tendrl-devel] Few questions/clarification regarding tendrl

[Shubhendu Tripathi]

Based on discussion over IRC tendrl-devel, John has a valid point.
I feel, it would be better to fork out from cthulu and then 
append/update the required changes as per our needs

-----------------------------------------------------
<jcsp> shubhendu, k4n0: the interesting thing about the ceph_bridge 
repository is there doesn't seem to be any copyright notice at all.
<jcsp> there's just a license.
  compare to e.g. calamari: 
https://github.com/ceph/calamari/blob/master/COPYING
  however that Calamari notice isn't strictly correct either as not all 
contributions are copyright Red Hat.
  the thing is that in existing Calamari  and Ceph repositories, the git 
history gives you the record of who contributed what
  when you just lift the code, you lose all that.
  this only needs addressing if anyone is planning to keep using that 
Calamari code in Tendrl
  I got the impression that there was an intention to drop it last time 
I spoke to mrugesh a month ago, but I haven't heard anything since
<shubhendu> jcsp, I am not sure this last part regarding dropping it. 
Yes I am in total agreement on losing out on contributors list if just 
lifted the code
-----------------------------------------------------

John, do you want to add/suggest something ??

Regards,
Shubhendu


On 09/01/2016 12:50 PM, Shubhendu Tripathi wrote:
> Same would be true for cthulu code as well if I am not wrong.
>
>
> On 08/31/2016 06:13 PM, Rohan Kanade wrote:
>> Weird, must have slipped out during the beginning.
>>
>> Thanks for pointing out, fixed.
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 3:18 PM, John Spray <jspray at redhat.com 
>> <mailto:jspray at redhat.com>> wrote:
>>
>>     On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 10:28 AM, Shubhendu Tripathi
>>     <shtripat at redhat.com <mailto:shtripat at redhat.com>> wrote:
>>     > On 08/31/2016 02:33 PM, Rohan Kanade wrote:
>>     >
>>     > On 31-Aug-2016 14:20, "Shubhendu Tripathi" <shtripat at redhat.com
>>     <mailto:shtripat at redhat.com>> wrote:
>>     >>
>>     >> Hi All,
>>     >>
>>     >> I got few questions in my mind which I wanted to clarify
>>     regarding tendrl
>>     >> new architecture
>>     >>
>>     >> 1. As per my understanding cthulu module from calamari is more
>>     or less
>>     >> used as ceph-bridge with certain changes may be. My question
>>     is, why not use
>>     >> cthulu as layered product and use as library only? Do   we
>>     really need to
>>     >> copy code as a separate project? Also even if we don't use
>>     cthulu as
>>     >> library, due to LGPL should we retain the copyright notices of
>>     the original
>>     >> sources as is in tendrl's  ceph-bridge code ?
>>     >>
>>     >
>>     > Cthulu is not used as is and there's various changes like
>>     removal of
>>     > saltstack as a dependency, changing its persistence layer for
>>     etcd instead
>>     > of Relational etc. It is difficult to maintain these features
>>     directly in
>>     > cthulu.
>>     >
>>     > Tendrl is LGPL2 and we should definitely run this through Legal
>>     just to be
>>     > sure
>>     >
>>     >> 2. The etcdobj of bridge-common looks taken from
>>     >> https://github.com/ashcrow/etcdobj
>>     <https://github.com/ashcrow/etcdobj>. Wouldn't this come with
>>     additional
>>     >> responsibility of maintaining this project and we might miss
>>     out of updates
>>     >> as well. Also if its intentional copy, should we retain the actual
>>     >> copyright/license message? Can we think of using this project
>>     as library?
>>     >>
>>     >
>>     > Etcdobj is a very small codebase. The original repo is hasn't
>>     seen any
>>     > activity since 4months. Etcd  is a central part of Tendrl and
>>     we need finer
>>     > control over this piece and it's lifecycle.
>>
>>     It looks like (I hope accidentally) someone has stripped the original
>>     header from that code.
>>
>>     If you're going to copy it, at least respect the conditions from the
>>     original, including the condition that source copies must reproduce
>>     the copyright notice and list of conditions.
>>     https://github.com/ashcrow/etcdobj/blob/master/src/etcdobj/fields.py
>>     <https://github.com/ashcrow/etcdobj/blob/master/src/etcdobj/fields.py>
>>
>>     John
>>
>>     >
>>     > Just a suggestion, why not contribute to the original project
>>     and make it
>>     > mature enough and use as library. At least replication of
>>     effort is reduced.
>>     >
>>     > Regarding the licensing issue. We should consult with Legal and
>>     rectify any
>>     > noncompliance
>>     >> These are just my points of view and I was not clear so thought of
>>     >> clarifying with broader audience.
>>     >>
>>     >> Thanks and Regards,
>>     >> Shubhendu
>>     >>
>>     >> PS: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/lgpl-2.1.en.html
>>     <https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/lgpl-2.1.en.html>
>>     >>
>>     >> _______________________________________________
>>     >> Tendrl-devel mailing list
>>     >> Tendrl-devel at redhat.com <mailto:Tendrl-devel at redhat.com>
>>     >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/tendrl-devel
>>     <https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/tendrl-devel>
>>     >>
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     > _______________________________________________
>>     > Tendrl-devel mailing list
>>     > Tendrl-devel at redhat.com <mailto:Tendrl-devel at redhat.com>
>>     > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/tendrl-devel
>>     <https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/tendrl-devel>
>>     >
>>
>>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/tendrl-devel/attachments/20160901/42d3e916/attachment.htm>