[openib-general] Re: Opensm - casting issues #2

[Fab Tillier]

> From: Roland Dreier [mailto:rolandd at cisco.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2005 10:08 AM
> 
>     Sean> My understanding is that the labs, who control the OpenIB
>     Sean> servers, refused to host any Windows related code, forcing
>     Sean> it to have a separate repository.
> 
>     Christoph> It shouldn't be difficult to find someone to host it.
>     Christoph> I could maybe ask if such a repo could be put at the
>     Christoph> lst.de servers.
> 
> Actually I think the issue was somewhat different.  Microsoft is so
> allergic to the GPL that they asked for the code to be in a physically
> separate repository.

Microsoft requested a separate repository, not separate servers.  Sandia
currently hosts the OpenIB SVN repository for Linux and did not want to host the
Windows code since they have no interest in it.  Yes, this makes things a bit
more cumbersome, but such is life.

The DDK license supposedly has limitations that make it incompatible with the
GPL license - building GPL code with the DDK would be a violation of the DDK
license somehow.  I have no interest in revisiting this topic - it is what it
is, we've argued endlessly about it already, so let's just move on.

That said, I personally don't see any issue with user-mode tools being
dual-license - it's the core bits that can't be.  As far as I'm concerned,
having OpenSM maintained in the Linux SVN repository is fine.  It would be handy
to have a shadow in the Windows repository so that it's easy to get and build,
and that's what I think the plan is.

As a note, the uDAPL code in the Windows SVN has the uDAPL triple license.

- Fab