Re: Larva content review for license

2016-02-05 Thread Sterling Hughes
On 2/5/16 8:39 AM, marko kiiskila wrote: First of all; thanks for going through the licenses. This is good info. On Feb 4, 2016, at 8:03 PM, Sterling Hughes wrote: We can raise this with legal, alternatively we could move the MCU & BSP definitions to github. People

Re: Larva content review for license

2016-02-04 Thread Justin Mclean
Hi, > If you'd like to create an overall shout-out, then go for it. The > Subversion project does this, and uses the same file to track partial > commit (as Mynewt has adopted). See: > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/subversion/trunk/COMMITTERS Apache Flex does this a little differently and

Re: Larva content review for license

2016-02-04 Thread Sterling Hughes
On 2/4/16 7:55 PM, Justin Mclean wrote: Hi, If you'd like to create an overall shout-out, then go for it. The Subversion project does this, and uses the same file to track partial commit (as Mynewt has adopted). See: http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/subversion/trunk/COMMITTERS Apache Flex

Re: Larva content review for license

2016-02-04 Thread Sterling Hughes
rel_v0_0_8-b1 for example. - newt's built in package manager knows to fetch packages from that git branch (we make the changes to newt once we branch.) May be an issue with this (I think not 100% sure), does that imply that a release can basically change over time? Or that it would be