From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-iy0-f171.google.com (mail-iy0-f171.google.com [209.85.210.171]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A90D4201A76 for ; Tue, 31 May 2011 09:03:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by iyi20 with SMTP id 20so5794296iyi.16 for ; Tue, 31 May 2011 09:20:39 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=HeYNUxNyuU9ilVDnVUXH9zNZTsNTqf3qDYSXQP9bz9M=; b=fIlUuBtE+PqTaV+Y+u6hL5rZmtfkFh8dZ2X2ZWQtPI/+j2/9pYb2ZViJDaPVTwPlE2 dYp5XghOhiZHHgWHKN2SiqzAuX+E4Bpil2ZA/dcMSUhaJrHnzYmtVPiXT1c/K2RXRwJd cy0fAZc0o0vSGtgPdMlxSOr1VDOTZCneg0JMc= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=LrKKR7K7+wQf27kW7R3ZRcprREdE1f6Vw3PWLfS9guHBLkkZJUs9FQ7/WPMrxGJb1R SSM3i/UcA43Cj+RuomvT7LhPZbgnQ7TrDU3W9D4D4s0hxlCGyky+xvmLK8SpM+/v+JNZ xvMCsf4cK+tv3jc7mQYzWnbEFxdNBWe0fmctk= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.231.73.195 with SMTP id r3mr7924307ibj.50.1306858838828; Tue, 31 May 2011 09:20:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.35.140 with HTTP; Tue, 31 May 2011 09:20:38 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <5FC6E7BF-B18B-4D41-A80A-84030C79115E@cc.gatech.edu> References: <5FC6E7BF-B18B-4D41-A80A-84030C79115E@cc.gatech.edu> Date: Tue, 31 May 2011 10:20:38 -0600 Message-ID: From: Dave Taht To: Nick Feamster Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=000e0cd4b8d2dc259704a494c8a7 Cc: bismark-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net Subject: Re: [Bismark-devel] repo locations + source code license? X-BeenThere: bismark-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: BISMark related software development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 31 May 2011 16:03:53 -0000 --000e0cd4b8d2dc259704a494c8a7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 8:56 AM, Nick Feamster wrot= e: > for the FCC writeup, the requirements are that the source code is publicl= y > 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", t= o 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 singl= e 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 > --=20 Dave T=E4ht SKYPE: davetaht US Tel: 1-239-829-5608 http://the-edge.blogspot.com --000e0cd4b8d2dc259704a494c8a7 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 8:56 AM, Nick Fe= amster <feam= ster@cc.gatech.edu> wrote:
for the FCC writeup, the requirements are that the source code is publicly = available.

Excellent.
=A0

"Any new or improved app must be openly licensed (i.e., open source) a= nd any non-personally identifiable data collected through the software tool= must be made available, upon request, to the public for independent analys= is."

Excellent.

1. What license are we going to use?


The Linux kernel is GPLv2.
=A0
2. Should we move to github= .com today? =A0I am happy to try to migrate the network dashboard code = into there. =A0What about: (1) the BISMark firmware build; (2) BISMark?
=

The packaging system for the firmware is in general GPLv2 and in g= eneral copyright is held by the openwrt team.

Individual packages ha= ve a variety of licences, ranging from "free beer", to BSD, to va= rious forms of the GPL.

I note that openwrt=A0 itself is VERY LARGE (gigabytes), and it would b= e a poor, and somewhat costly, idea to fork the existing capetown-wndr3700 = repository and put on github.

Rather it would be best to document t= he (now very few) changes to the openwrt core, push anything they will acce= pt up to them, and store the patches that openwrt would not accept as is, i= n 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 variou= s bits of openwrt into a single catagory called 'firmware'.

= What do you mean by management software?
=A0
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 T=E4ht
SKYPE: d= avetaht
US Tel: 1-239-829-5608
http://the-edge.blogspot.com
--000e0cd4b8d2dc259704a494c8a7--