Skip to content

feat: replaced aura fork with sp-partner-chains-consensus#1700

Draft
Klapeyron wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
feat/remove_aura_fork
Draft

feat: replaced aura fork with sp-partner-chains-consensus#1700
Klapeyron wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
feat/remove_aura_fork

Conversation

@Klapeyron

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Overview

🗹 TODO before merging

  • Ready

📌 Submission Checklist

  • All commits are signed off (git commit -s) for the DCO
  • Changes are backward-compatible (or flagged if breaking)
  • Pull request description explains why the change is needed
  • Self-reviewed the diff
  • I have included a change file, or skipped for this reason:
  • If the changes introduce a new feature, I have bumped the node minor version
  • Update documentation (if relevant)
  • Updated AGENTS.md if build commands, architecture, or workflows changed
  • No new todos introduced

🧪 Testing Evidence

Please describe any additional testing aside from CI:

  • Additional tests are provided (if possible)

🔱 Fork Strategy

  • Node Runtime Update
  • Node Client Update
  • Other:
  • N/A

Links

@Klapeyron Klapeyron self-assigned this Jun 16, 2026
@Klapeyron Klapeyron force-pushed the feat/remove_aura_fork branch from f498537 to ffb74d8 Compare June 16, 2026 07:18
Signed-off-by: Tomasz Bartos <tomasz.bartos@shielded.io>
@Klapeyron Klapeyron force-pushed the feat/remove_aura_fork branch from ffb74d8 to 34e2a95 Compare June 16, 2026 07:32
authors.workspace = true
homepage.workspace = true
edition.workspace = true
license = "Apache-2.0"

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can't be Apache, because it depends on "sc-consensus"

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I am not sure that is correct. We are not making any modifications to the GPL3 code here, also existing primitives we migrated from PC are Apache licensed and GPL3 with Classpath exception exists precisely to let you link/combine that code with software under other licenses — including Apache — without the combined work becoming GPL, so an Apache crate depending on sc-consensus is exactly the intended use

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Classpath exception gives you ability to use GPL3 for building binary without having to GPL3 the code that builds this binary.

This is clearly library crate, it has to be tainted with GPL3. Exception doesn't work here.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants