This is merely a historical archive of years 2008-2021, before the migration to mailman3.
A maintained and still updated list archive can be found at https://lists.osmocom.org/hyperkitty/list/OpenBSC@lists.osmocom.org/.
Harald Welte laforge at gnumonks.orgHi Steve and Max, sorry for catching up that late. It is only now in my holidays that I finally am able to find some time to read through the osmocom mailing lists again. On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 08:17:58PM +0100, Steve Markgraf wrote: > On 26.03.2014 18:26, Max.Suraev at fairwaves.co wrote: > > I've just noticed (yepp, I'm very observant :) that COPYING in > > libosmocore is GPLv2. Is there any particular reason we still do > > not use GPLv3? libosmocore was started as a GPLv2+ project, in order to ensure maximum compatibility to a variety of applications. Some free software applications out there are still GPLv2, and we want them to be able to use libosmocore. * libosmocodec is pure GPLv2+ * libosmoctrl is pure GPLv2+ * libosmovty is pure GPLv2+ > Good point, git grep "either version 3" actually shows that there are > quite some files that are GPLv3+, so the compiled and linked binaries > already make use of the "or any later version" of the other GPLv2+ > licensed files. This is actually a problem, and one that needs fixing. 1) libosmogb Most of the hits are in libosmogb, as the libosmogb code was first developed as part of (AGPLv3+) OpenBSC/OsmoSGSN and then migrated to libosmocore.git reporitory to be also used from osmo-pcu, not just from the SGSN side. The majority of the osmo-pcu codebase appears to be GPLv2+, so linking with a GPLv3+ libosmogb is fine. However, an AGPL libosmogb would not be suitable. I've reviewed the copyright ownership /authorship situation of libosmogb and see if we can make sure that all authors agree to a GPLv3+ licensing of it. Based on the review, we have the following copyright holders: * Harald Welte * Holger Freyther * sysmocom (Jacob, Holger?) * Andreas Eversberg Holger/Andreas: * Would you agree to license libosmogb under GPLv2+ or GPLv3+? * Do you have any preference regarding v2+ or v3+? 2) libosmocore: strrb.c / loggingrb.c These are the only two files of libosmocore, which claim to be GPLv3+. I would personally consider this a mistake at the time, but I've included Katerina in the Cc. Holger/Katerina: * Do you remember how and why this code states it is GPLv3+ instead of the usual GPLv2+ in libosmocore? * Was this intentional or a mistake? * Irrespective of the past, would you agree to license strrb/loggingrb under GPLv2+? If yes, I will commit the related code change 3) libosmogsm: gsm0411_smc.c und gsm0411_smr.c This is due to jolly first writing them as part of osmoocomBB and then later moving them to libosmocore. Jolly: Can you please confirm if you are willing to license them under GPLv2+ instead of GPLv3+ as indicated in the source code? 4) libosmogsm: the imported milenage code. it is GPLv2 or BSD, so we have to use it under BSD license. This should be indicated somewhere explicitly. > So replacing COPYING with GPLv3 definitely would make sense imho. See above, the devil is in the details, it's not that simple. Regards, Harald -- - Harald Welte <laforge at gnumonks.org> http://laforge.gnumonks.org/ ============================================================================ "Privacy in residential applications is a desirable marketing option." (ETSI EN 300 175-7 Ch. A6)