Hi Carsten,
on the topic of rewriting history ;) it would be interesting to know if you
have an estimation of the proportion of RIOT code your people would have
developed that would have been contributed back to the master branch, over
the last 1,5+ years, taking into account the constraints of you
Sorry Adam, I don't know how your name got intermixed into my answer.
I had no intention to misquote you, and I like your previous letter very much.
--
“My head was aching, and I had a singular feeling—altogether new
to me—that some one else was trying to get alice’s configuration”
— http://the
Am Tue, 9 Dec 2014 10:36:32 +0100
schrieb Emmanuel Baccelli :
> this is a gentle reminder to input your opinions on this thread before
> Wednesday night (i.e., tomorrow).
You cannot use any of my contributions under any BSD license, because I don't
think that it is a logic choice.
I would welcom
Am Tue, 9 Dec 2014 00:43:26 +0100
schrieb Carsten Bormann :
> On 09 Dec 2014, at 00:09, Adam Hunt wrote:
> I could have people working on RIOT for those 1.5 years...
If you actually had any intentions to contribute to RIOT, then you would dual
or tri-license your contributions ...
--
“My head
Hi Oleg !
Thank you for your help !
Maxence
-Message d'origine-
De : devel [mailto:devel-boun...@riot-os.org] De la part de Oleg Hahm
Envoyé : mardi 9 décembre 2014 15:51
À : RIOT OS kernel developers
Objet : Re: [riot-devel] Problem with RPL-UDP example for SAMR21
Hi Maxence!
> Did y
> >I suggest to keep it simple: In the case you copy files that are
> >basically empty as your example below or in the case you remove
> >everything except the function declarations (as probably in low-level
> >drivers as gpio.c and others) I would just remove the existing copyright
> >and authors
Hey,
On 12/09/14 16:07, Hauke Petersen wrote:
I suggest to keep it simple: In the case you copy files that are
basically empty as your example below or in the case you remove
everything except the function declarations (as probably in low-level
drivers as gpio.c and others) I would just remove t
Hi Johan,
On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 1:27 AM, Johann Fischer
wrote:
> Hello RIOTers,
>
> Emmanuel Baccelli wrote:
> > we have been receiving an increasing amount of negative feedback from
> > various companies concerning the practical usability of our LGPL license
> in
> > their context, being a sh
Hi Joakim,
I suggest to keep it simple: In the case you copy files that are
basically empty as your example below or in the case you remove
everything except the function declarations (as probably in low-level
drivers as gpio.c and others) I would just remove the existing copyright
and author
Hi Kevin,
On Tue, 9 Dec 2014, ROUSSEL Kévin wrote:
> I'm not absolutely against licence switch but... I actually feel
> uneasy about about this kind of demands...
>
> If I understand right, some corporations which have probably
> contributed nothing to the project just barges in and said : "if
Hi Maxence!
> Did you find something about my problem ?
Sorry for the lack of responsiveness. I had some weird problems with the board
last Friday (couldn't get any output using the rpl_udp example, while other
examples work fine). Will investigate further and let you know as soon as I
figure som
What is the correct procedure regarding author and copyright headers
when I write a new port, but base the file off another port?
For example:
I start by copying the cpu/stm32f1 directory, as a basis for my new port.
The CPUs share no code other than RIOT generic code, such as API
(function declar
Hello,
I'm not absolutely against licence switch but... I actually feel uneasy
about about this kind of demands...
If I understand right, some corporations which have probably contributed
nothing to the project just barges in and said : "if you want us to use
your work, you have to let us ma
Hi Adam,
On Mon, 8 Dec 2014, Adam Hunt wrote:
> There's another option on the table that would allow a potential
> license change to be put off for some time while still being able to
> do it with minimal headache down the road. Any license change is
> obviously going to require all the past c
Hey,
On 12/09/2014 12:43 AM, Carsten Bormann wrote:
allow a potential license change to be put off
As long as relicensing hasn’t happened, RIOT stays in suspended animation for
those of us who care about actual pickup in products. Waiting some more (a
license change has been discussed for m
Hi everyone,
this is a gentle reminder to input your opinions on this thread before
Wednesday night (i.e., tomorrow).
Thanks,
Emmanuel
On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 12:43 AM, Carsten Bormann wrote:
> On 09 Dec 2014, at 00:09, Adam Hunt wrote:
> >
> > allow a potential license change to be put off
>
>
16 matches
Mail list logo
