[ECOS] Who's maintaining CVS
Peter Vandenabeele
peter.vandenabeele@mind.be
Tue Sep 24 19:12:00 GMT 2002
On Wed, Sep 25, 2002 at 02:31:48AM +0100, Jonathan Larmour wrote:
> Peter Vandenabeele wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 25, 2002 at 02:01:30AM +0100, Jonathan Larmour wrote:
> > [...]
> >
> >>Jani appears to have forgotten that he did even submit his lwIP changes,
> >>several months ago, using the very same principle, i.e. declaring the code
> >>is being put in the public domain. The maintainers know full well about
> >>this get-around :-).
> >>
> >>Peter is right that this is acceptable *however* we do not want to permit
> >>this as the usual course of action.
> >
> >
> > As you may have found out by reading the rest of the thread, this was only
> > the case if lwIP was original code written entirely by Jani himself. If
> > lwIP is based on original code distributed to to Jani under the modified-BSD
> > license, I believe this is not longer a correct method (this is detailed in
> > later msg's). Pity.
>
> The maintainers make an exception for assignment for an established
> external open source project, assuming it has an appropriate licence - PD
> or modified BSD is basically it. It is up to that external project to
> enforce its own copyright with the licence they distribute it under.
>
> However, it is the responsibility of the eCos maintainers to protect and
> enforce the copyright and legal integrity of any other contributions to eCos.
>
> No one needs to assign lwIP's copyright - if it was asked for before, it
> may well have been simply because the person involved did not realise it
> was an external established project. I know I've made mistakes like that
> before. The same would not apply to modifications made to eCos itself to
> support lwIP, as proved by the existing io/eth/current/src/lwip/eth_drv.c
Do I understand correctly that for this special case (lwIP as an established
project distributed by its Copyright holders under modified-BSD), Copyright
Assignment to Red Hat is (as an exception) not required for inclusion in the
main tree ?
This would resolve all questions I had about this.
Peter
> Jifl
> --
> --[ "You can complain because roses have thorns, or you ]--
> --[ can rejoice because thorns have roses." -Lincoln ]-- Opinions==mine
--
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://sources.redhat.com/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss
More information about the Ecos-discuss
mailing list