D-bus model proposal for pay for access features - LicenseService at OpenBMC

[Abhilash Kollam]

By upstreaming license-related code, I believe what we are trying is to
have a frequent rebase with the upstream code base. Right now we cannot
rebase the PLDM code because of it.  Can we separate the PLDM model for
license from main PLDM code base? Can we have redfish implementation for
License in bmcweb and upstream? If we can do both then we can keep the
majority of license-related code downstream. It does not hamper our
rebasing effort as well.

Please correct me if I am wrong.

On Fri, Oct 20, 2023 at 11:12 AM Sunitha Harish <sunithaharish04 at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
> On 20-10-2023 10:36, Andrew Jeffery wrote:
> > On Thu, 2023-10-19 at 15:56 +0530, Sunitha Harish wrote:
> >> More over this new meta-oe work will turn out to be costly.
> > It's a bit of a tangent, but I have to ask: What's the basis for the
> > assertion that adding a recipe to meta-openembedded or some other
> > upstream layer will be costly? That's not at all my experience or
> > expectation.
> >
> > Andrew
> We are not planning to have a license SERVER at BMC, which will
> interpret and process the licenses. There is no usecase for us to do one
> in near future as well. Only need is to add a way at BMC which can
> enable user to upload the license by implementing the LicenseService
> schemas. Considering that, i mentioned that this will be costly for me.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/openbmc/attachments/20231020/32675319/attachment.htm>