On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 8:56 AM, Nick Feamster wrote: > for the FCC writeup, the requirements are that the source code is publicly > available. > Excellent. > > "Any new or improved app must be openly licensed (i.e., open source) and > any non-personally identifiable data collected through the software tool > must be made available, upon request, to the public for independent > analysis." > Excellent. > > 1. What license are we going to use? > > The Linux kernel is GPLv2. > 2. Should we move to github.com today? I am happy to try to migrate the > network dashboard code into there. What about: (1) the BISMark firmware > build; (2) BISMark? > The packaging system for the firmware is in general GPLv2 and in general copyright is held by the openwrt team. Individual packages have a variety of licences, ranging from "free beer", to BSD, to various forms of the GPL. I note that openwrt itself is VERY LARGE (gigabytes), and it would be a poor, and somewhat costly, idea to fork the existing capetown-wndr3700 repository and put on github. Rather it would be best to document the (now very few) changes to the openwrt core, push anything they will accept up to them, and store the patches that openwrt would not accept as is, in a git repo per such. > For the firmware and management software, I'm actually not sure if the > repositories are currently public? > > I'm uncomfortable with lumping all the various bits of openwrt into a single catagory called 'firmware'. What do you mean by management software? > How should we handle this issue? > > Carefully, and thoroughly. > -Nick > _______________________________________________ > Bismark-devel mailing list > Bismark-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bismark-devel > -- Dave Täht SKYPE: davetaht US Tel: 1-239-829-5608 http://the-edge.blogspot.com