Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [paho-dev] Redis persistence patch and hiredis dependency

cross-posting to Technology PMC ML



Le 24/06/13 22:25, « Andy Piper » <andypiperuk@xxxxxxxxx> a écrit :

>Thanks Mike - I was guided towards the 3rd party licenses policy by the
>IP team.
>
>AFAIUI Paho code is all jointly licensed EPL and EDL already, and
>that's what the "Approved Licenses for Non-Code, Example, and Other
>Content" document refers to as well.
>
>Very keen to take PMC direction on this.
>
>On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 9:17 PM, Mike Milinkovich
><mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> All,
>>
>> I agree that this sounds like a "works-with". But that is a
>>determination
>> that the PMC needs to make. It is also possible that this policy on
>> "Approved Licenses for Non-Code, Example, and Other Content" may apply
>>here.
>> http://www.eclipse.org/legal/noncodelicenses.php
>>
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: paho-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>>[mailto:paho-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
>>> On Behalf Of Andy Piper
>>> Sent: June-24-13 2:21 PM
>>> To: General development discussions for paho project
>>> Subject: [paho-dev] Redis persistence patch and hiredis dependency
>>>
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> Al Stockdill-Mander has contributed an implementation of a client
>> persistence
>>> plugin for the MQTT C client, which uses Redis as backing store.
>>>
>>> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=410419
>>>
>>> It does so by using the hiredis library.
>>>
>>> https://github.com/redis/hiredis
>>>
>>> hiredis is under a BSD license.
>>>
>>> It's important to note that this is a sample, and it is not core to the
>> project i.e. it
>>> is entirely optional, and serves as an example of how one might go
>>>about
>>> implementing an alternative persistence store.
>>>
>>> As such I think it comes under the "works-with" rather than the
>> "prerequisite"
>>> definition from the 3rd party dependencies policy
>>> 
>>>http://www.eclipse.org/org/documents/Eclipse_Policy_and_Procedure_for_3r
>>>d
>>> _Party_Dependencies_Final.pdf
>>>
>>> Under the same policy we are required to discuss this issue in the
>>>open on
>> the
>>> mailing list. Does anyone have any objection to this sample being
>>>added to
>> the
>>> C client, with an appropriate set of documentation describing that it
>>>is
>> an
>>> example, and optional? Any members of the PMC care to comment?
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>> Andy
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Andy Piper | Farnborough, Hampshire (UK)
>>> blog: http://andypiper.co.uk   |   skype: andypiperuk
>>> twitter: @andypiper  |  images: http://www.flickr.com/photos/andypiper
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> paho-dev mailing list
>>> paho-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>> http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/paho-dev
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> paho-dev mailing list
>> paho-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/paho-dev
>
>
>
>-- 
>Andy Piper | Farnborough, Hampshire (UK)
>blog: http://andypiper.co.uk   |   skype: andypiperuk
>twitter: @andypiper  |  images: http://www.flickr.com/photos/andypiper
>_______________________________________________
>paho-dev mailing list
>paho-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/paho-dev
>



Back to the top