similar to: [LLVMdev] Creating a GDB 7.5 test suite repository

Samba adopts GPLv3 for future releases. --------------------------------------- After internal consideration in the Samba Team we have decided to adopt the GPLv3 and LGPLv3 licences for all future releases of Samba. The GPLv3 is the updated version of the GPLv2 license under which Samba is currently distributed. It has been updated to improve compatibility with other licenses and to make it

Samba adopts GPLv3 for future releases. --------------------------------------- After internal consideration in the Samba Team we have decided to adopt the GPLv3 and LGPLv3 licences for all future releases of Samba. The GPLv3 is the updated version of the GPLv2 license under which Samba is currently distributed. It has been updated to improve compatibility with other licenses and to make it

Hello everyone, I'm not sure who to ask about this, but I have a licensing question. I'm writing a utility to allow Git to connect to SMB shares, which uses libsmbclient. I was thinking about using libgit2 in my program: http://libgit2.github.com/ . This library is licensed as GPLv2 only, with a linking exception to link to any program without restriction. My understanding is that, since

Hi Timo (and all!), Venaktesh is a friend of mine working on a patch to the venerable Alpine mail reader so it can read Maildir format mailboxes on disk. Venkatesh wanted to know if he could use some code from Dovecot's lib-storage (safely opening/reading Maildirs, including accounting for NFS and ESTALE) and the UID->message mapping code. This way, Dovecot and Alpine would agree on

Hi, I'm confused about my licensing obligation with respect to the Xapian SWIG bindings. I've got a python wrapper that sits above the standard Xapian Python/SWIG bindings, and I wasn't sure if the *intent* of the Xapian team is that my python wrapper - and any code that also uses my wrapper also falls under GPLv2. It seems unclear if the FSF's position on dynamic linking in

On Fri, 30 Aug 2019 at 17:34, Finkel, Hal J. via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > On 8/30/19 10:18 AM, Sam Elliott via llvm-dev wrote: > > TL;DR: I am proposing to add the GCC C Torture suite [1], as an additional external source of tests for the “nightly” test suite. If you are willing to review the patch, it is here: https://reviews.llvm.org/D66887 >

On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 10:03:05AM -0800, Yandell, Henri wrote: > We?re looking into using Hivex and came across something odd. While > the license of hivex.c is LGPL 2.1, it appears to require the GPL > 3.0 licensed gnulib package for a few minor functions ( full_read, > full_write and c_toupper ). There are also a few GPL 3.0 build > files. It has always been our intention to

Hello, I would like to see Xapian used more widely in the PHP community. The major obstacle is that binaries of the PHP extension cannot be distributed. I've been reading earlier discussions on this and wonder if there's now an option. My starting points were https://trac.xapian.org/wiki/FAQ/PHP%20Bindings%20Package and the discussion at https://trac.xapian.org/ticket/191. One comment

This may have been raised before and if so I apologise for not being able to find it. I was wondering if someone on the list can please explain the relationship that GPLv3 has in preventing Apple from distributing updated builds with their operating systems. I've read over the GPLv3 (I'm not lawyer or anything) and I would guess it has something to do with the patent agreements? I'll

On Sat, 12 Mar 2016, Jeremy Allison wrote: > GPLv3 should guarentee that you can replace the Samba > on *any* device. That's the whole point of GPLv3 - no > DRM. > > If you find a Samba device using any Samba 3.2 or > newer that doesn't allow you to replace it, please > let us know so we can start the compliance process. I wonder how that will play out with the new

On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 06:15:30PM +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: > > > Am 12.03.2016 um 18:08 schrieb Sketch: > >On Sat, 12 Mar 2016, Jeremy Allison wrote: > > > >>GPLv3 should guarentee that you can replace the Samba > >>on *any* device. That's the whole point of GPLv3 - no > >>DRM. > >> > >>If you find a Samba device using any

There are 1500 tests total, and about 100 on the platform-agnostic blacklist. Alex and I do not think this is an onerous burden for maintenance, either as an external test suite or if the test suite is imported. In the long term, if we import the tests, we know we will have to do updates when the Embecosm work lands, and beyond that updates can be more sporadic. It’s not clear to me how much

On 19 October 2015 at 18:12, David Chisnall via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > One worry is that Apache 2 is incompatible with GPLv2 (is it incompatible with other licenses?) This is interesting, I did not know that... http://www.apache.org/licenses/GPL-compatibility.html "Despite our best efforts, the FSF has never considered the Apache License to be compatible

Hello Jeremy and samba maintainers, I am using Samba 3.0.37 and I am confused about the license. On one hand both the COPYING file in the 3.0.37 tarball and your website indicates that version 3.0.37 is GPLv2. http://news.samba.org/announcements/samba_gplv3/ On the other hand, in the 3.0.37 tarball, there are many files with GPLv3 headers without any exception. For instance, several file in

Dear Chandler, First, can you articulate why you want to move the test suite to Github? Is it taking up too much space, or is there some other problem that you're trying to solve? I think you clearly explain why moving the revision history isn't necessary, but it's not clear to me what problem you are trying to solve. Second, if we move the revision history to Github, it would

On 12/03/16 16:08, Jeremy Allison wrote: > On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 12:50:50PM +0100, Luca Olivetti wrote: >> El 12/03/16 a les 12:37, Rowland penny ha escrit: >> >>> Well yes, but these are usually a mass market product and will no doubt, >>> in the fullness of time, get to use a version of Samba 4 seeing as how >>> 3.6 has been EOL since March 2015.

On Jun 22, 2011, at 5:29 PM, Jim Grosbach wrote: > > On Jun 22, 2011, at 7:22 AM, Renato Golin wrote: > >> On 22 June 2011 14:33, Damjan Marion <damjan.marion at gmail.com> wrote: >>> Problem is that in case when old binutils are used (in my case freebsd is using old one due to license upgrade to GPLv3) AS doesn't understand new mnemonics and fails. >>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 ============================================================== "Patience is the companion of wisdom." Saint Augustine ============================================================== Release Announcements ===================== This is the first stable release of Samba 3.2.0. Please be aware that Samba is now distributed under

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 ============================================================== "Patience is the companion of wisdom." Saint Augustine ============================================================== Release Announcements ===================== This is the first stable release of Samba 3.2.0. Please be aware that Samba is now distributed under

On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 06:31:13PM +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: > > i personally don't care what any soho-equipment manufacturer does or not, so > it's not abut "attitude" - it's simple logic - and maybe the switch to GPLv3 > is the reason for the whole subject "The sad state of samba 4 adaption" Utter bollocks, and I have the OEMs to prove it.