On Saturday 22 November 2008, Jon Elson wrote: > Aren't the licenses right in EACH code file?
Most, yes. But nowhere is there a list of which licences are involved or to which binaries they apply. Not a problem for a user (generally), but if anyone is redistributing this stuff, it should be - Without knowing what licences are used, how is anyone able to meet the Terms & Conditions ?? As has already been pointed out, there is one file (as an example) claiming to be GPL2, pluto_step_rbf.h - In it's self, an autogenerated file from pluto_step.rbf - The HDL sources are labelled as "GPL ver 2 or later".. Now, if Epler can provide the tools to generate the intermediate rbf file then the GPL T&C can be satisfied. > I'm sure there are some files that are missing proper license declarations. You are probably correct which is why I recommended Les does an audit of any/all sources he wishes to use and/or distribute. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ _______________________________________________ Emc-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
