From fandree at amazon.com  Wed Jun  1 07:05:16 2022
From: fandree at amazon.com (Florescu, Andreea)
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2022 07:05:16 +0000
Subject: [Rust-VMM] Moderation queue flushed
In-Reply-To: <20220531151714.22g7beno4ili2uho@yuggoth.org>
References: <20220531151714.22g7beno4ili2uho@yuggoth.org>
Message-ID: <1654067116138.21887@amazon.com>

Hey Jeremy,

Thanks for fixing this. I can also help with moderating the list.
Let's chat in private.

If anybody else would be interested, that'd be great, the more the better.

Andreea
________________________________________
From: Jeremy Stanley <fungi at yuggoth.org>
Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2022 6:17 PM
To: rust-vmm at lists.opendev.org
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [Rust-VMM] Moderation queue flushed

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and know the content is safe.



Just a heads up that I flushed some several dozen messages which
were waiting for a moderator to approve, so if you received a sudden
flood of messages for the ML (some dating back to February), that's
why. The majority were held because they were being sent from or
cross-posted by people who aren't subscribed to this list, or
because they had very large recipient lists (>10 addresses), or were
over the default 40KB size limit.

On a related note, if anyone is interested in helping check the
moderation queue for this list regularly, please let me know.
--
Jeremy Stanley



Amazon Development Center (Romania) S.R.L. registered office: 27A Sf. Lazar Street, UBC5, floor 2, Iasi, Iasi County, 700045, Romania. Registered in Romania. Registration number J22/2621/2005.



From anitabopensourceday at gmail.com  Wed Jun  8 20:39:42 2022
From: anitabopensourceday at gmail.com (Open Source Day AnitaB GHC)
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2022 16:39:42 -0400
Subject: [Rust-VMM] 2022 Grace Hopper Celebration Open Source Day - Call for
 Projects
Message-ID: <CAJZX+LmgU2Pd4uFRaefGJ24Xa-zo_Otk1FiR-q2Fe-0JjedJSA@mail.gmail.com>

*Hello,We're excited to announce that the 2022 Grace Hopper Celebration
Open Source Day is open for projects <https://bit.ly/osd22-cfp>!Open Source
Day (OSD) is an all-day hack-a-thon at Grace Hopper Celebration in which
participants of all levels contribute and learn about Open Source while
working on projects designed to solve real-world problems. OSD provides an
opportunity for attendees of all skill levels and backgrounds to learn and
experience open source contributions with the support of project
maintainers, experienced mentors, and expert speakers, providing a fast
track to becoming open source contributors.This year, OSD will be a virtual
pre-event before the Grace Hopper Celebration, scheduled for Friday,
September 16, 2022, from 8:00am to 3:00pm U.S. Pacific Time.If you're an
open source project maintainer, we invite you to submit your project to be
part of Open Source Day 2022!OSD provides a great way for open source
project maintainers to promote your project, earn new contributors, and
improve overall health of your project. In addition, you will take part in
the movement to increase diversity in open source! According to the 2021
Linux foundation DEI Survey report
<https://www.linuxfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/LFResearch_DEISurvey_Report_121321_6.pdf>,
only 14% of open source participants identify as women and 4% as non-binary
or third gender and other estimates are a lot lower. Join us and be part of
the change!CFP link: https://bit.ly/osd22-cfp-projects
<https://bit.ly/osd22-cfp-projects>One of the big focuses of Open Source
Day is highlighting women open source maintainers. If you are aware of any
open source projects with women maintainers whom you think are a great fit
for this opportunity, please forward this announcement to them.Note:
Selected project maintainers will receive a complimentary virtual ticket to
the 2022 Grace Hopper Celebration.Best regards,The Open Source Day Team*


-- 
The Open Source Day Team
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opendev.org/pipermail/rust-vmm/attachments/20220608/e688271c/attachment.htm>

From fandree at amazon.com  Fri Jun 17 07:14:19 2022
From: fandree at amazon.com (Florescu, Andreea)
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2022 07:14:19 +0000
Subject: [Rust-VMM] Licensing Issue in rust-vmm crates
Message-ID: <1655450059131.13567@amazon.com>

Hey folks,

afaria at redhat.com<mailto:afaria at redhat.com> reported an issue [1] with the license of some of the rust-vmm crates. In our first rust-vmm meetup we decided the license for the crates to be BSD-3-Clause OR Apache 2.0 (as it's also specified in the meeting notes available here [2]), but when we did the implementation of the crate it looks like we wrote the license for some of the files and crates as "Apache-2.0 AND BSD-3-Clause" instead. This license is unfortunately incompatible with projects such QEMU, and makes the rust-vmm crates impossible to use.

With this email I would like to get your agreement to update the license to one that is compatible with QEMU and the other known customers of rust-vmm. One thing that we need to discuss is what the license should be. As there is code in vmm-sys-util coming directly from Crosvm I don't think a Apache 2.0 OR BSD-3-Clause license is appropriate because from my understanding this would require the Crosvm code to be re-licensed as Apache 2.0 OR BSD-3-Clause as well. I would like to propose to re-license it as BSD-3-Clause as this is compatible with the licenses of all projects.

More details about the specific files where this is a problem are available in the issue [1].

Thanks,
Andreea

[1] https://github.com/rust-vmm/vmm-sys-util/issues/161
[2] http://lists.opendev.org/pipermail/rust-vmm/2019-May/000200.html




Amazon Development Center (Romania) S.R.L. registered office: 27A Sf. Lazar Street, UBC5, floor 2, Iasi, Iasi County, 700045, Romania. Registered in Romania. Registration number J22/2621/2005.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opendev.org/pipermail/rust-vmm/attachments/20220617/1a384a17/attachment.htm>

From andreea.florescu15 at gmail.com  Wed Jun 22 15:08:46 2022
From: andreea.florescu15 at gmail.com (Andreea Florescu)
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2022 18:08:46 +0300
Subject: [Rust-VMM] Licensing Issue in rust-vmm crates
Message-ID: <CAKcU8Z3ks8mPS-G4ivc5aqAPCp-=uRRLqXAAB9GdAwY93Eo2mA@mail.gmail.com>

[Resending this email from my personal email address as it seems like my
other email got into spam for most of you :(]

Hey folks,

afaria at redhat.com reported an issue [1] with the license of some of the
rust-vmm crates. In our first rust-vmm meetup we decided the license for
the crates to be BSD-3-Clause OR Apache 2.0 (as it's also specified in the
meeting notes available here [2]), but when we did the implementation of
the crate it looks like we wrote the license for some of the files and
crates as "Apache-2.0 AND BSD-3-Clause" instead. This license is
unfortunately incompatible with projects such QEMU, and makes the rust-vmm
crates impossible to use.

With this email I would like to get your agreement to update the license to
one that is compatible with QEMU and the other known customers of rust-vmm.
One thing that we need to discuss is what the license should be. As there
is code in vmm-sys-util coming directly from Crosvm I don't think a Apache
2.0 OR BSD-3-Clause license is appropriate because from my understanding
this would require the Crosvm code to be re-licensed as Apache 2.0 OR
BSD-3-Clause as well. I would like to propose to re-license it as
BSD-3-Clause as this is compatible with the licenses of all projects.

More details about the specific files where this is a problem are available
in the issue [1].

Thanks,
Andreea

[1] https://github.com/rust-vmm/vmm-sys-util/issues/161
[2] http://lists.opendev.org/pipermail/rust-vmm/2019-May/000200.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opendev.org/pipermail/rust-vmm/attachments/20220622/729c20b2/attachment.htm>

From pbonzini at redhat.com  Wed Jun 22 15:16:43 2022
From: pbonzini at redhat.com (Paolo Bonzini)
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2022 17:16:43 +0200
Subject: [Rust-VMM] Licensing Issue in rust-vmm crates
In-Reply-To: <CAKcU8Z3ks8mPS-G4ivc5aqAPCp-=uRRLqXAAB9GdAwY93Eo2mA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAKcU8Z3ks8mPS-G4ivc5aqAPCp-=uRRLqXAAB9GdAwY93Eo2mA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CABgObfYmivrMbMuHmSzkm8Kp+aqwpAd+P1gvdXK51=aO0DUoXg@mail.gmail.com>

Hi, Apache-2.0 OR BSD-3-clause is okay as the overall license of the
package, even if individual files maybe just BSD-3-clause.

The licensee is free to ignore the extra requirements of the Apache license
for files derived from crosvm; but they could do it anyway for _all_ files,
because it's already allowed by the OR.

Pailo

Il mer 22 giu 2022, 17:11 Andreea Florescu <andreea.florescu15 at gmail.com>
ha scritto:

> [Resending this email from my personal email address as it seems like my
> other email got into spam for most of you :(]
>
> Hey folks,
>
> afaria at redhat.com reported an issue [1] with the license of some of the
> rust-vmm crates. In our first rust-vmm meetup we decided the license for
> the crates to be BSD-3-Clause OR Apache 2.0 (as it's also specified in the
> meeting notes available here [2]), but when we did the implementation of
> the crate it looks like we wrote the license for some of the files and
> crates as "Apache-2.0 AND BSD-3-Clause" instead. This license is
> unfortunately incompatible with projects such QEMU, and makes the rust-vmm
> crates impossible to use.
>
> With this email I would like to get your agreement to update the license
> to one that is compatible with QEMU and the other known customers of
> rust-vmm. One thing that we need to discuss is what the license should be.
> As there is code in vmm-sys-util coming directly from Crosvm I don't think
> a Apache 2.0 OR BSD-3-Clause license is appropriate because from my
> understanding this would require the Crosvm code to be re-licensed as
> Apache 2.0 OR BSD-3-Clause as well. I would like to propose to re-license
> it as BSD-3-Clause as this is compatible with the licenses of all projects.
>
> More details about the specific files where this is a problem are
> available in the issue [1].
>
> Thanks,
> Andreea
>
> [1] https://github.com/rust-vmm/vmm-sys-util/issues/161
> [2] http://lists.opendev.org/pipermail/rust-vmm/2019-May/000200.html
> _______________________________________________
> Rust-vmm mailing list
> Rust-vmm at lists.opendev.org
> http://lists.opendev.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rust-vmm
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opendev.org/pipermail/rust-vmm/attachments/20220622/d68bd8df/attachment.htm>

From afaria at redhat.com  Wed Jun 22 16:30:37 2022
From: afaria at redhat.com (Alberto Faria)
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2022 17:30:37 +0100
Subject: [Rust-VMM] Licensing Issue in rust-vmm crates
In-Reply-To: <CABgObfYmivrMbMuHmSzkm8Kp+aqwpAd+P1gvdXK51=aO0DUoXg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAKcU8Z3ks8mPS-G4ivc5aqAPCp-=uRRLqXAAB9GdAwY93Eo2mA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABgObfYmivrMbMuHmSzkm8Kp+aqwpAd+P1gvdXK51=aO0DUoXg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAELaAXzhpm=C_fu8AENnWuBkGnMXXEOeDyK6qTndUjZih8D_Cg@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Jun 22, 2022 at 4:16 PM Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini at redhat.com> wrote:
> Hi, Apache-2.0 OR BSD-3-clause is okay as the overall license of the package, even if individual files maybe just BSD-3-clause.
>
> The licensee is free to ignore the extra requirements of the Apache license for files derived from crosvm; but they could do it anyway for _all_ files, because it's already allowed by the OR.

I may be misunderstanding this, but it sounds like you're assuming
that Apache-2.0 is a superset of BSD-3-clause in terms of user
obligations. I have no idea if this is actually the case or not, but
if it is, then "Apache-2.0 OR BSD-3-clause" == "BSD-3-clause", which
in a sense contradicts the wide use of the former in Rust crates.

Perhaps it really is a superset and the advantage of OR'ing Apache 2.0
is that the user gets some legal protection against patents?

Alberto



From fungi at yuggoth.org  Wed Jun 22 22:47:29 2022
From: fungi at yuggoth.org (Jeremy Stanley)
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2022 22:47:29 +0000
Subject: [Rust-VMM] Licensing Issue in rust-vmm crates
In-Reply-To: <CAELaAXzhpm=C_fu8AENnWuBkGnMXXEOeDyK6qTndUjZih8D_Cg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAKcU8Z3ks8mPS-G4ivc5aqAPCp-=uRRLqXAAB9GdAwY93Eo2mA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABgObfYmivrMbMuHmSzkm8Kp+aqwpAd+P1gvdXK51=aO0DUoXg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAELaAXzhpm=C_fu8AENnWuBkGnMXXEOeDyK6qTndUjZih8D_Cg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20220622224729.kf7xvrky4f7hs4an@yuggoth.org>

On 2022-06-22 17:30:37 +0100 (+0100), Alberto Faria wrote:
[...]
> I may be misunderstanding this, but it sounds like you're assuming
> that Apache-2.0 is a superset of BSD-3-clause in terms of user
> obligations. I have no idea if this is actually the case or not, but
> if it is, then "Apache-2.0 OR BSD-3-clause" == "BSD-3-clause", which
> in a sense contradicts the wide use of the former in Rust crates.
[...]

I'm not a lawyer, but my long-time understanding has been that when
you distribute software under "license x or license y" that allows
people who are receiving and possibly redistributing and deriving
that software to do so based on their choice of either license.
Blanket statements like this are rarely helpful however when the
software consists of parts under different licenses, such as
shipping some files under BSD-3-clause and other files under
Apache-2.0 as part of the same project. Under those circumstances,
the sum total of the software is effectively held to the union of
the requirements for both licenses, but for permissive-style
licenses like these it's also not expected that the licenses of some
files impact the licenses of the other files, so long as the chosen
licenses have compatible terms (permissive-style licenses do not
require you to distribute derivative works under the same terms).

The situation changes dramatically when copyleft-style licenses are
involved, since they often (as is the case with GPL for example)
convey transitive requirements which forbid additional licensing
requirements on the complete work and require redistribution under
the same license instead.

As for whether Apache-2.0 is a superset of BSD-3-clause, that's
implied by its ancestry, since the original Apache license was
effectively a direct copy of BSD-4-clause, and then for Apache-1.1
the authors dropped the advertising clause that Berkeley had also
dropped, making it then equivalent to BSD-3-clause. Apache-2.0 is a
superset of the requirements of Apache-1.1 (and so BSD-3-clause) as
it merely adds a grant of patent license to the original terms.
-- 
Jeremy Stanley
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 963 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.opendev.org/pipermail/rust-vmm/attachments/20220622/6eeb5c48/attachment.sig>

From kennelson11 at gmail.com  Wed Jun 29 17:19:16 2022
From: kennelson11 at gmail.com (Kendall Nelson)
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2022 12:19:16 -0500
Subject: [Rust-VMM] Fwd: October PTG 2022 Team Signup
In-Reply-To: <CAJ6yrQiBRdFZwGs6PpCcvyZ3F3CXa1S+PBU3A7jedVAPfkRN1A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJ6yrQiBRdFZwGs6PpCcvyZ3F3CXa1S+PBU3A7jedVAPfkRN1A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJ6yrQiQPuh6Ldf3SbbFU2GbVCo_Waz5jAnmNuHnGfoXRgbRig@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Everyone,

At the Berlin Summit, we announced the next PTG will be held from Monday,
October 17th to Thursday, October 20th, 2022 in Columbus, OH!

To signup your team, you must complete the survey[1] by August 12th at 7:00
UTC.

We NEED accurate contact information for the moderator of your team?s
sessions. This is because the survey information will be used to organize
the schedule signups which will be done via the PTGBot. If you are not on
IRC, please get setup[2] on the OFTC network and join #openinfra-events.
You are also encouraged to familiarize yourself with the PTGBot
documentation[3] as well. If you have any questions, please reach out!

Information about signing up for timeslots will be sent to moderators mid
to late August.

Registration will open soon! A discounted room block at the PTG venue will
be available.

Continue to visit openinfra.dev/ptg for updates.

-Kendall (diablo_rojo)

[1] Team Survey:
https://openinfrafoundation.formstack.com/forms/oct2022_ptg_team_signup
[2] Setup IRC: https://docs.openstack.org/contributors/common/irc.html
[3] PTGBot README:
https://opendev.org/openstack/ptgbot/src/branch/master/README.rst
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opendev.org/pipermail/rust-vmm/attachments/20220629/8a01f3e9/attachment.htm>

From andreea.florescu15 at gmail.com  Thu Jun 30 07:01:09 2022
From: andreea.florescu15 at gmail.com (Andreea Florescu)
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2022 10:01:09 +0300
Subject: [Rust-VMM] Licensing Issue in rust-vmm crates
In-Reply-To: <20220622224729.kf7xvrky4f7hs4an@yuggoth.org>
References: <CAKcU8Z3ks8mPS-G4ivc5aqAPCp-=uRRLqXAAB9GdAwY93Eo2mA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABgObfYmivrMbMuHmSzkm8Kp+aqwpAd+P1gvdXK51=aO0DUoXg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAELaAXzhpm=C_fu8AENnWuBkGnMXXEOeDyK6qTndUjZih8D_Cg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20220622224729.kf7xvrky4f7hs4an@yuggoth.org>
Message-ID: <CAKcU8Z3MrsWEb6ocgNhn8P_Dh-dh3xYSH5=-tPRGLPa9Qaqq3A@mail.gmail.com>

I just wanted to clarify something as well, I do not feel strongly about
changing the license to BSD-3-Clause, we can also use Apache 2.0 OR
BSD-3-Clause if that makes sense. My interest is to fix the problem
initially reported which significantly limits the usefulness of this
project as it cannot be used by projects like QEMU.
As most contributions are coming from Google (indirectly), Amazon, Intel
and Alibaba, it would be really helpful to also get input on updating the
license from the folks that are contributing from the respective companies.
>From the Amazon side of things, we discussed this internally and we're
onboard with the change.

Thanks,
Andreea

On Thu, Jun 23, 2022 at 1:48 AM Jeremy Stanley <fungi at yuggoth.org> wrote:

> On 2022-06-22 17:30:37 +0100 (+0100), Alberto Faria wrote:
> [...]
> > I may be misunderstanding this, but it sounds like you're assuming
> > that Apache-2.0 is a superset of BSD-3-clause in terms of user
> > obligations. I have no idea if this is actually the case or not, but
> > if it is, then "Apache-2.0 OR BSD-3-clause" == "BSD-3-clause", which
> > in a sense contradicts the wide use of the former in Rust crates.
> [...]
>
> I'm not a lawyer, but my long-time understanding has been that when
> you distribute software under "license x or license y" that allows
> people who are receiving and possibly redistributing and deriving
> that software to do so based on their choice of either license.
> Blanket statements like this are rarely helpful however when the
> software consists of parts under different licenses, such as
> shipping some files under BSD-3-clause and other files under
> Apache-2.0 as part of the same project. Under those circumstances,
> the sum total of the software is effectively held to the union of
> the requirements for both licenses, but for permissive-style
> licenses like these it's also not expected that the licenses of some
> files impact the licenses of the other files, so long as the chosen
> licenses have compatible terms (permissive-style licenses do not
> require you to distribute derivative works under the same terms).
>
> The situation changes dramatically when copyleft-style licenses are
> involved, since they often (as is the case with GPL for example)
> convey transitive requirements which forbid additional licensing
> requirements on the complete work and require redistribution under
> the same license instead.
>
> As for whether Apache-2.0 is a superset of BSD-3-clause, that's
> implied by its ancestry, since the original Apache license was
> effectively a direct copy of BSD-4-clause, and then for Apache-1.1
> the authors dropped the advertising clause that Berkeley had also
> dropped, making it then equivalent to BSD-3-clause. Apache-2.0 is a
> superset of the requirements of Apache-1.1 (and so BSD-3-clause) as
> it merely adds a grant of patent license to the original terms.
> --
> Jeremy Stanley
> _______________________________________________
> Rust-vmm mailing list
> Rust-vmm at lists.opendev.org
> http://lists.opendev.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rust-vmm
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opendev.org/pipermail/rust-vmm/attachments/20220630/7ea4b516/attachment.htm>