[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH 0 of 3] Making PyHurd build again under cython 0.14.1.

From: Arne Babenhauserheide
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0 of 3] Making PyHurd build again under cython 0.14.1.
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 23:40:39 +0200
User-agent: Wanderlust/2.14.1 (Bad Medicine-pre) SEMI/1.14.6 (Maruoka) FLIM/1.14.9 (Goj┼Ź) APEL/10.8 Emacs/23.3 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MULE/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)


At Fri, 8 Apr 2011 21:05:55 +0200,
<olafBuddenhagen@gmx.net> wrote:
> > This patch makes pyhurd build again under cython 0.14.1.
> You should rather Cc: it to Anatoly, who will (hopefully) be your
> mentor...

I will. I CCed it to you, because we discussed in IRC and because I value your 

Besides: Yes, I can access my Mails from abroads, though I needed to readup on 
dbus first :)

> > It is quite rough (copied a file from cython, needs to be included
> > cleanly).
> What would "included cleanly" mean? And why is it necessary?

The file is available in Cython and should be used directly from the Cython 
installation instead of being copied in. 

> I already stated it on IRC, but for the record: I'm not sure this is
> even possible. The rest of the Hurd can't be upgraded to v3, because of
> the v2-only Linux code (mostly in pfinet). It all depends on whether the
> Python bindings can be considered an independant work, or classify as
> derived...

That quesion isn't as easy as I'd like it to be. Sending messages to Mach 
should not be viral (shared memory is even used to avoid the viral nature of 
the GPL by corps), but a direct translation from one langage to another is a 
derived work. 

Need to read up more on the options. I am not sure if I can really avoid the 
problems when using Cython - need to check Cython infos.

> > (I adjusted the copyright header).
> Was the original license "v2 or later"? Otherwise it's not up to you to
> make that change :-)

It is v2 or later, I checked that first :)

> Which brings up another matter: who owns the copyright on this? Did
> Anatoly assign it to FSF? Otherwise it won't qualify for upstream
> inclusion...

I'll need to talk to anatoly about that. 

Best wishes, 

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]