[Bismark-devel] repo locations + source code license?

[Bismark-devel] repo locations + source code license?

[Nick Feamster]

for the FCC writeup, the requirements are that the source code is publicly available.

"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."

1. What license are we going to use?

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?

For the firmware and management software, I'm actually not sure if the repositories are currently public?

How should we handle this issue?

-Nick

Re: [Bismark-devel] repo locations + source code license?

[Walter de Donato]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1553 bytes --]

I usually feel comfortable using GPL licenses.
I don't know if in this case choosing the Affero GPL would be more
appropriate.
What do you think?

I can try to migrate Bismark to github if Dave didn't start yet doing it.
Probably Bismark builds should be kept apart from it. Ideas?

Walter

2011/5/31 Nick Feamster <feamster@cc.gatech.edu>

> for the FCC writeup, the requirements are that the source code is publicly
> available.
>
> "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."
>
> 1. What license are we going to use?
>
> 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?
>
> For the firmware and management software, I'm actually not sure if the
> repositories are currently public?
>
> How should we handle this issue?
>
> -Nick
> _______________________________________________
> Bismark-devel mailing list
> Bismark-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bismark-devel
>
>


-- 
Walter de Donato, PhD Student
Dipartimento di Informatica e Sistemistica
Università  degli Studi di Napoli "Federico II"
Via Claudio 21 -- 80125 Napoli (Italy)
Phone: +39 081 76 83821 - Fax: +39 081 76 83816
Email: walter.dedonato@unina.it
WWW: http://wpage.unina.it/walter.dedonato

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2270 bytes --]

Re: [Bismark-devel] repo locations + source code license?

[Nick Feamster]

Yes, I think perhaps bismark builds could be kept in a separate repo.

Not sure what we could call that one.  bismark-router?  

-Nick

On May 31, 2011, at 5:07 PM, Walter de Donato wrote:

> I usually feel comfortable using GPL licenses.
> I don't know if in this case choosing the Affero GPL would be more appropriate.
> What do you think?
> 
> I can try to migrate Bismark to github if Dave didn't start yet doing it.
> Probably Bismark builds should be kept apart from it. Ideas?
> 
> Walter
> 
> 2011/5/31 Nick Feamster <feamster@cc.gatech.edu>
> for the FCC writeup, the requirements are that the source code is publicly available.
> 
> "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."
> 
> 1. What license are we going to use?
> 
> 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?
> 
> For the firmware and management software, I'm actually not sure if the repositories are currently public?
> 
> How should we handle this issue?
> 
> -Nick
> _______________________________________________
> Bismark-devel mailing list
> Bismark-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bismark-devel
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Walter de Donato, PhD Student
> Dipartimento di Informatica e Sistemistica
> Università  degli Studi di Napoli "Federico II"
> Via Claudio 21 -- 80125 Napoli (Italy)
> Phone: +39 081 76 83821 - Fax: +39 081 76 83816
> Email: walter.dedonato@unina.it
> WWW: http://wpage.unina.it/walter.dedonato
> 

Re: [Bismark-devel] repo locations + source code license?

[Walter de Donato]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1981 bytes --]

Why don't bismark-firmwares?

Walter

2011/5/31 Nick Feamster <feamster@cc.gatech.edu>

> Yes, I think perhaps bismark builds could be kept in a separate repo.
>
> Not sure what we could call that one.  bismark-router?
>
> -Nick
>
> On May 31, 2011, at 5:07 PM, Walter de Donato wrote:
>
> > I usually feel comfortable using GPL licenses.
> > I don't know if in this case choosing the Affero GPL would be more
> appropriate.
> > What do you think?
> >
> > I can try to migrate Bismark to github if Dave didn't start yet doing it.
> > Probably Bismark builds should be kept apart from it. Ideas?
> >
> > Walter
> >
> > 2011/5/31 Nick Feamster <feamster@cc.gatech.edu>
> > for the FCC writeup, the requirements are that the source code is
> publicly available.
> >
> > "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."
> >
> > 1. What license are we going to use?
> >
> > 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?
> >
> > For the firmware and management software, I'm actually not sure if the
> repositories are currently public?
> >
> > How should we handle this issue?
> >
> > -Nick
> > _______________________________________________
> > Bismark-devel mailing list
> > Bismark-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
> > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bismark-devel
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Walter de Donato, PhD Student
> > Dipartimento di Informatica e Sistemistica
> > Università  degli Studi di Napoli "Federico II"
> > Via Claudio 21 -- 80125 Napoli (Italy)
> > Phone: +39 081 76 83821 - Fax: +39 081 76 83816
> > Email: walter.dedonato@unina.it
> > WWW: http://wpage.unina.it/walter.dedonato
> >
>
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2901 bytes --]

Re: [Bismark-devel] repo locations + source code license?

[Nick Feamster]

Yes.  "bismark-firmware" (singular) seems good.

On May 31, 2011, at 5:29 PM, Walter de Donato wrote:

> Why don't bismark-firmwares?
> 
> Walter
> 
> 2011/5/31 Nick Feamster <feamster@cc.gatech.edu>
> Yes, I think perhaps bismark builds could be kept in a separate repo.
> 
> Not sure what we could call that one.  bismark-router?
> 
> -Nick
> 
> On May 31, 2011, at 5:07 PM, Walter de Donato wrote:
> 
> > I usually feel comfortable using GPL licenses.
> > I don't know if in this case choosing the Affero GPL would be more appropriate.
> > What do you think?
> >
> > I can try to migrate Bismark to github if Dave didn't start yet doing it.
> > Probably Bismark builds should be kept apart from it. Ideas?
> >
> > Walter
> >
> > 2011/5/31 Nick Feamster <feamster@cc.gatech.edu>
> > for the FCC writeup, the requirements are that the source code is publicly available.
> >
> > "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."
> >
> > 1. What license are we going to use?
> >
> > 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?
> >
> > For the firmware and management software, I'm actually not sure if the repositories are currently public?
> >
> > How should we handle this issue?
> >
> > -Nick
> > _______________________________________________
> > Bismark-devel mailing list
> > Bismark-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
> > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bismark-devel
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Walter de Donato, PhD Student
> > Dipartimento di Informatica e Sistemistica
> > Università  degli Studi di Napoli "Federico II"
> > Via Claudio 21 -- 80125 Napoli (Italy)
> > Phone: +39 081 76 83821 - Fax: +39 081 76 83816
> > Email: walter.dedonato@unina.it
> > WWW: http://wpage.unina.it/walter.dedonato
> >
> 
> 
> 

Re: [Bismark-devel] repo locations + source code license?

[Walter de Donato]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2291 bytes --]

Sold! :-)


2011/5/31 Nick Feamster <feamster@cc.gatech.edu>

> Yes.  "bismark-firmware" (singular) seems good.
>
> On May 31, 2011, at 5:29 PM, Walter de Donato wrote:
>
> > Why don't bismark-firmwares?
> >
> > Walter
> >
> > 2011/5/31 Nick Feamster <feamster@cc.gatech.edu>
> > Yes, I think perhaps bismark builds could be kept in a separate repo.
> >
> > Not sure what we could call that one.  bismark-router?
> >
> > -Nick
> >
> > On May 31, 2011, at 5:07 PM, Walter de Donato wrote:
> >
> > > I usually feel comfortable using GPL licenses.
> > > I don't know if in this case choosing the Affero GPL would be more
> appropriate.
> > > What do you think?
> > >
> > > I can try to migrate Bismark to github if Dave didn't start yet doing
> it.
> > > Probably Bismark builds should be kept apart from it. Ideas?
> > >
> > > Walter
> > >
> > > 2011/5/31 Nick Feamster <feamster@cc.gatech.edu>
> > > for the FCC writeup, the requirements are that the source code is
> publicly available.
> > >
> > > "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."
> > >
> > > 1. What license are we going to use?
> > >
> > > 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?
> > >
> > > For the firmware and management software, I'm actually not sure if the
> repositories are currently public?
> > >
> > > How should we handle this issue?
> > >
> > > -Nick
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Bismark-devel mailing list
> > > Bismark-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
> > > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bismark-devel
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Walter de Donato, PhD Student
> > > Dipartimento di Informatica e Sistemistica
> > > Università  degli Studi di Napoli "Federico II"
> > > Via Claudio 21 -- 80125 Napoli (Italy)
> > > Phone: +39 081 76 83821 - Fax: +39 081 76 83816
> > > Email: walter.dedonato@unina.it
> > > WWW: http://wpage.unina.it/walter.dedonato
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3420 bytes --]

Re: [Bismark-devel] repo locations + source code license?

[Nick Feamster]

Do you have access to the "bismark-devel" user on github?

On May 31, 2011, at 5:35 PM, Walter de Donato wrote:

> Sold! :-)
> 
> 
> 2011/5/31 Nick Feamster <feamster@cc.gatech.edu>
> Yes.  "bismark-firmware" (singular) seems good.
> 
> On May 31, 2011, at 5:29 PM, Walter de Donato wrote:
> 
> > Why don't bismark-firmwares?
> >
> > Walter
> >
> > 2011/5/31 Nick Feamster <feamster@cc.gatech.edu>
> > Yes, I think perhaps bismark builds could be kept in a separate repo.
> >
> > Not sure what we could call that one.  bismark-router?
> >
> > -Nick
> >
> > On May 31, 2011, at 5:07 PM, Walter de Donato wrote:
> >
> > > I usually feel comfortable using GPL licenses.
> > > I don't know if in this case choosing the Affero GPL would be more appropriate.
> > > What do you think?
> > >
> > > I can try to migrate Bismark to github if Dave didn't start yet doing it.
> > > Probably Bismark builds should be kept apart from it. Ideas?
> > >
> > > Walter
> > >
> > > 2011/5/31 Nick Feamster <feamster@cc.gatech.edu>
> > > for the FCC writeup, the requirements are that the source code is publicly available.
> > >
> > > "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."
> > >
> > > 1. What license are we going to use?
> > >
> > > 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?
> > >
> > > For the firmware and management software, I'm actually not sure if the repositories are currently public?
> > >
> > > How should we handle this issue?
> > >
> > > -Nick
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Bismark-devel mailing list
> > > Bismark-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
> > > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bismark-devel
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Walter de Donato, PhD Student
> > > Dipartimento di Informatica e Sistemistica
> > > Università  degli Studi di Napoli "Federico II"
> > > Via Claudio 21 -- 80125 Napoli (Italy)
> > > Phone: +39 081 76 83821 - Fax: +39 081 76 83816
> > > Email: walter.dedonato@unina.it
> > > WWW: http://wpage.unina.it/walter.dedonato
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 

Re: [Bismark-devel] repo locations + source code license?

[Walter de Donato]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3017 bytes --]

I think so...
I'm currently setting up everything to start importing the Bismark
repository.


2011/5/31 Nick Feamster <feamster@cc.gatech.edu>

> Do you have access to the "bismark-devel" user on github?
>
> On May 31, 2011, at 5:35 PM, Walter de Donato wrote:
>
> > Sold! :-)
> >
> >
> > 2011/5/31 Nick Feamster <feamster@cc.gatech.edu>
> > Yes.  "bismark-firmware" (singular) seems good.
> >
> > On May 31, 2011, at 5:29 PM, Walter de Donato wrote:
> >
> > > Why don't bismark-firmwares?
> > >
> > > Walter
> > >
> > > 2011/5/31 Nick Feamster <feamster@cc.gatech.edu>
> > > Yes, I think perhaps bismark builds could be kept in a separate repo.
> > >
> > > Not sure what we could call that one.  bismark-router?
> > >
> > > -Nick
> > >
> > > On May 31, 2011, at 5:07 PM, Walter de Donato wrote:
> > >
> > > > I usually feel comfortable using GPL licenses.
> > > > I don't know if in this case choosing the Affero GPL would be more
> appropriate.
> > > > What do you think?
> > > >
> > > > I can try to migrate Bismark to github if Dave didn't start yet doing
> it.
> > > > Probably Bismark builds should be kept apart from it. Ideas?
> > > >
> > > > Walter
> > > >
> > > > 2011/5/31 Nick Feamster <feamster@cc.gatech.edu>
> > > > for the FCC writeup, the requirements are that the source code is
> publicly available.
> > > >
> > > > "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."
> > > >
> > > > 1. What license are we going to use?
> > > >
> > > > 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?
> > > >
> > > > For the firmware and management software, I'm actually not sure if
> the repositories are currently public?
> > > >
> > > > How should we handle this issue?
> > > >
> > > > -Nick
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Bismark-devel mailing list
> > > > Bismark-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
> > > > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bismark-devel
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Walter de Donato, PhD Student
> > > > Dipartimento di Informatica e Sistemistica
> > > > Università  degli Studi di Napoli "Federico II"
> > > > Via Claudio 21 -- 80125 Napoli (Italy)
> > > > Phone: +39 081 76 83821 - Fax: +39 081 76 83816
> > > > Email: walter.dedonato@unina.it
> > > > WWW: http://wpage.unina.it/walter.dedonato
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>


-- 
Walter de Donato, PhD Student
Dipartimento di Informatica e Sistemistica
Università  degli Studi di Napoli "Federico II"
Via Claudio 21 -- 80125 Napoli (Italy)
Phone: +39 081 76 83821 - Fax: +39 081 76 83816
Email: walter.dedonato@unina.it
WWW: http://wpage.unina.it/walter.dedonato

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4634 bytes --]

Re: [Bismark-devel] repo locations + source code license?

[Nick Feamster]

OK, cool.  I will import network dashboard later tonight then, too.

On May 31, 2011, at 5:39 PM, Walter de Donato wrote:

> I think so... 
> I'm currently setting up everything to start importing the Bismark repository.
> 
> 
> 2011/5/31 Nick Feamster <feamster@cc.gatech.edu>
> Do you have access to the "bismark-devel" user on github?
> 
> On May 31, 2011, at 5:35 PM, Walter de Donato wrote:
> 
> > Sold! :-)
> >
> >
> > 2011/5/31 Nick Feamster <feamster@cc.gatech.edu>
> > Yes.  "bismark-firmware" (singular) seems good.
> >
> > On May 31, 2011, at 5:29 PM, Walter de Donato wrote:
> >
> > > Why don't bismark-firmwares?
> > >
> > > Walter
> > >
> > > 2011/5/31 Nick Feamster <feamster@cc.gatech.edu>
> > > Yes, I think perhaps bismark builds could be kept in a separate repo.
> > >
> > > Not sure what we could call that one.  bismark-router?
> > >
> > > -Nick
> > >
> > > On May 31, 2011, at 5:07 PM, Walter de Donato wrote:
> > >
> > > > I usually feel comfortable using GPL licenses.
> > > > I don't know if in this case choosing the Affero GPL would be more appropriate.
> > > > What do you think?
> > > >
> > > > I can try to migrate Bismark to github if Dave didn't start yet doing it.
> > > > Probably Bismark builds should be kept apart from it. Ideas?
> > > >
> > > > Walter
> > > >
> > > > 2011/5/31 Nick Feamster <feamster@cc.gatech.edu>
> > > > for the FCC writeup, the requirements are that the source code is publicly available.
> > > >
> > > > "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."
> > > >
> > > > 1. What license are we going to use?
> > > >
> > > > 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?
> > > >
> > > > For the firmware and management software, I'm actually not sure if the repositories are currently public?
> > > >
> > > > How should we handle this issue?
> > > >
> > > > -Nick
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Bismark-devel mailing list
> > > > Bismark-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
> > > > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bismark-devel
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Walter de Donato, PhD Student
> > > > Dipartimento di Informatica e Sistemistica
> > > > Università  degli Studi di Napoli "Federico II"
> > > > Via Claudio 21 -- 80125 Napoli (Italy)
> > > > Phone: +39 081 76 83821 - Fax: +39 081 76 83816
> > > > Email: walter.dedonato@unina.it
> > > > WWW: http://wpage.unina.it/walter.dedonato
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Walter de Donato, PhD Student
> Dipartimento di Informatica e Sistemistica
> Università  degli Studi di Napoli "Federico II"
> Via Claudio 21 -- 80125 Napoli (Italy)
> Phone: +39 081 76 83821 - Fax: +39 081 76 83816
> Email: walter.dedonato@unina.it
> WWW: http://wpage.unina.it/walter.dedonato
> 

Re: [Bismark-devel] repo locations + source code license?

[Nick Feamster]

Cool.  The report is "done" except for polishing, and some source code pointers, which I will also add to projectbismark.net once they are ready.  I'll send a draft out to HNDR now for comments.

-Nick

On May 31, 2011, at 5:39 PM, Walter de Donato wrote:

> I think so... 
> I'm currently setting up everything to start importing the Bismark repository.
> 
> 
> 2011/5/31 Nick Feamster <feamster@cc.gatech.edu>
> Do you have access to the "bismark-devel" user on github?
> 
> On May 31, 2011, at 5:35 PM, Walter de Donato wrote:
> 
> > Sold! :-)
> >
> >
> > 2011/5/31 Nick Feamster <feamster@cc.gatech.edu>
> > Yes.  "bismark-firmware" (singular) seems good.
> >
> > On May 31, 2011, at 5:29 PM, Walter de Donato wrote:
> >
> > > Why don't bismark-firmwares?
> > >
> > > Walter
> > >
> > > 2011/5/31 Nick Feamster <feamster@cc.gatech.edu>
> > > Yes, I think perhaps bismark builds could be kept in a separate repo.
> > >
> > > Not sure what we could call that one.  bismark-router?
> > >
> > > -Nick
> > >
> > > On May 31, 2011, at 5:07 PM, Walter de Donato wrote:
> > >
> > > > I usually feel comfortable using GPL licenses.
> > > > I don't know if in this case choosing the Affero GPL would be more appropriate.
> > > > What do you think?
> > > >
> > > > I can try to migrate Bismark to github if Dave didn't start yet doing it.
> > > > Probably Bismark builds should be kept apart from it. Ideas?
> > > >
> > > > Walter
> > > >
> > > > 2011/5/31 Nick Feamster <feamster@cc.gatech.edu>
> > > > for the FCC writeup, the requirements are that the source code is publicly available.
> > > >
> > > > "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."
> > > >
> > > > 1. What license are we going to use?
> > > >
> > > > 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?
> > > >
> > > > For the firmware and management software, I'm actually not sure if the repositories are currently public?
> > > >
> > > > How should we handle this issue?
> > > >
> > > > -Nick
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Bismark-devel mailing list
> > > > Bismark-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
> > > > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bismark-devel
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Walter de Donato, PhD Student
> > > > Dipartimento di Informatica e Sistemistica
> > > > Università  degli Studi di Napoli "Federico II"
> > > > Via Claudio 21 -- 80125 Napoli (Italy)
> > > > Phone: +39 081 76 83821 - Fax: +39 081 76 83816
> > > > Email: walter.dedonato@unina.it
> > > > WWW: http://wpage.unina.it/walter.dedonato
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Walter de Donato, PhD Student
> Dipartimento di Informatica e Sistemistica
> Università  degli Studi di Napoli "Federico II"
> Via Claudio 21 -- 80125 Napoli (Italy)
> Phone: +39 081 76 83821 - Fax: +39 081 76 83816
> Email: walter.dedonato@unina.it
> WWW: http://wpage.unina.it/walter.dedonato
> 

Re: [Bismark-devel] repo locations + source code license?

[Dave Taht]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1967 bytes --]

On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 8:56 AM, Nick Feamster <feamster@cc.gatech.edu>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

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3510 bytes --]

Re: [Bismark-devel] repo locations + source code license?

[Walter de Donato]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3572 bytes --]

I think I did it.
Can you please confirm me that everything is ok?

Walter

2011/5/31 Walter de Donato <walter.dedonato@unina.it>

> I think so...
> I'm currently setting up everything to start importing the Bismark
> repository.
>
>
> 2011/5/31 Nick Feamster <feamster@cc.gatech.edu>
>
>> Do you have access to the "bismark-devel" user on github?
>>
>> On May 31, 2011, at 5:35 PM, Walter de Donato wrote:
>>
>> > Sold! :-)
>> >
>> >
>> > 2011/5/31 Nick Feamster <feamster@cc.gatech.edu>
>> > Yes.  "bismark-firmware" (singular) seems good.
>> >
>> > On May 31, 2011, at 5:29 PM, Walter de Donato wrote:
>> >
>> > > Why don't bismark-firmwares?
>> > >
>> > > Walter
>> > >
>> > > 2011/5/31 Nick Feamster <feamster@cc.gatech.edu>
>> > > Yes, I think perhaps bismark builds could be kept in a separate repo.
>> > >
>> > > Not sure what we could call that one.  bismark-router?
>> > >
>> > > -Nick
>> > >
>> > > On May 31, 2011, at 5:07 PM, Walter de Donato wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > I usually feel comfortable using GPL licenses.
>> > > > I don't know if in this case choosing the Affero GPL would be more
>> appropriate.
>> > > > What do you think?
>> > > >
>> > > > I can try to migrate Bismark to github if Dave didn't start yet
>> doing it.
>> > > > Probably Bismark builds should be kept apart from it. Ideas?
>> > > >
>> > > > Walter
>> > > >
>> > > > 2011/5/31 Nick Feamster <feamster@cc.gatech.edu>
>> > > > for the FCC writeup, the requirements are that the source code is
>> publicly available.
>> > > >
>> > > > "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."
>> > > >
>> > > > 1. What license are we going to use?
>> > > >
>> > > > 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?
>> > > >
>> > > > For the firmware and management software, I'm actually not sure if
>> the repositories are currently public?
>> > > >
>> > > > How should we handle this issue?
>> > > >
>> > > > -Nick
>> > > > _______________________________________________
>> > > > Bismark-devel mailing list
>> > > > Bismark-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
>> > > > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bismark-devel
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > --
>> > > > Walter de Donato, PhD Student
>> > > > Dipartimento di Informatica e Sistemistica
>> > > > Università  degli Studi di Napoli "Federico II"
>> > > > Via Claudio 21 -- 80125 Napoli (Italy)
>> > > > Phone: +39 081 76 83821 - Fax: +39 081 76 83816
>> > > > Email: walter.dedonato@unina.it
>> > > > WWW: http://wpage.unina.it/walter.dedonato
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Walter de Donato, PhD Student
> Dipartimento di Informatica e Sistemistica
> Università  degli Studi di Napoli "Federico II"
> Via Claudio 21 -- 80125 Napoli (Italy)
> Phone: +39 081 76 83821 - Fax: +39 081 76 83816
> Email: walter.dedonato@unina.it
> WWW: http://wpage.unina.it/walter.dedonato
>
>


-- 
Walter de Donato, PhD Student
Dipartimento di Informatica e Sistemistica
Università  degli Studi di Napoli "Federico II"
Via Claudio 21 -- 80125 Napoli (Italy)
Phone: +39 081 76 83821 - Fax: +39 081 76 83816
Email: walter.dedonato@unina.it
WWW: http://wpage.unina.it/walter.dedonato

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 5678 bytes --]

Re: [Bismark-devel] repo locations + source code license?

[Dave Taht]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4293 bytes --]

https://github.com/bismark-devel has two repos now.

To meet requirements of the FCC, would it be sufficient merely to point them
at the above url, as we organize and add repositories for bismark-packages,
etc?

On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 11:01 AM, Walter de Donato <walter.dedonato@unina.it
> wrote:

> I think I did it.
> Can you please confirm me that everything is ok?
>
> Walter
>
>
> 2011/5/31 Walter de Donato <walter.dedonato@unina.it>
>
>> I think so...
>> I'm currently setting up everything to start importing the Bismark
>> repository.
>>
>>
>> 2011/5/31 Nick Feamster <feamster@cc.gatech.edu>
>>
>>> Do you have access to the "bismark-devel" user on github?
>>>
>>> On May 31, 2011, at 5:35 PM, Walter de Donato wrote:
>>>
>>> > Sold! :-)
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > 2011/5/31 Nick Feamster <feamster@cc.gatech.edu>
>>> > Yes.  "bismark-firmware" (singular) seems good.
>>> >
>>> > On May 31, 2011, at 5:29 PM, Walter de Donato wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > Why don't bismark-firmwares?
>>> > >
>>> > > Walter
>>> > >
>>> > > 2011/5/31 Nick Feamster <feamster@cc.gatech.edu>
>>> > > Yes, I think perhaps bismark builds could be kept in a separate repo.
>>> > >
>>> > > Not sure what we could call that one.  bismark-router?
>>> > >
>>> > > -Nick
>>> > >
>>> > > On May 31, 2011, at 5:07 PM, Walter de Donato wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > > I usually feel comfortable using GPL licenses.
>>> > > > I don't know if in this case choosing the Affero GPL would be more
>>> appropriate.
>>> > > > What do you think?
>>> > > >
>>> > > > I can try to migrate Bismark to github if Dave didn't start yet
>>> doing it.
>>> > > > Probably Bismark builds should be kept apart from it. Ideas?
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Walter
>>> > > >
>>> > > > 2011/5/31 Nick Feamster <feamster@cc.gatech.edu>
>>> > > > for the FCC writeup, the requirements are that the source code is
>>> publicly available.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > "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."
>>> > > >
>>> > > > 1. What license are we going to use?
>>> > > >
>>> > > > 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?
>>> > > >
>>> > > > For the firmware and management software, I'm actually not sure if
>>> the repositories are currently public?
>>> > > >
>>> > > > How should we handle this issue?
>>> > > >
>>> > > > -Nick
>>> > > > _______________________________________________
>>> > > > Bismark-devel mailing list
>>> > > > Bismark-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>> > > > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bismark-devel
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > --
>>> > > > Walter de Donato, PhD Student
>>> > > > Dipartimento di Informatica e Sistemistica
>>> > > > Università  degli Studi di Napoli "Federico II"
>>> > > > Via Claudio 21 -- 80125 Napoli (Italy)
>>> > > > Phone: +39 081 76 83821 - Fax: +39 081 76 83816
>>> > > > Email: walter.dedonato@unina.it
>>> > > > WWW: http://wpage.unina.it/walter.dedonato
>>> > > >
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Walter de Donato, PhD Student
>> Dipartimento di Informatica e Sistemistica
>> Università  degli Studi di Napoli "Federico II"
>> Via Claudio 21 -- 80125 Napoli (Italy)
>> Phone: +39 081 76 83821 - Fax: +39 081 76 83816
>> Email: walter.dedonato@unina.it
>> WWW: http://wpage.unina.it/walter.dedonato
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Walter de Donato, PhD Student
> Dipartimento di Informatica e Sistemistica
> Università  degli Studi di Napoli "Federico II"
> Via Claudio 21 -- 80125 Napoli (Italy)
> Phone: +39 081 76 83821 - Fax: +39 081 76 83816
> Email: walter.dedonato@unina.it
> WWW: http://wpage.unina.it/walter.dedonato
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 7448 bytes --]

Re: [Bismark-devel] repo locations + source code license?

[Nick Feamster]

Yes, I think that is probably fair.

We could point them at a (password-protected) URL for the current build *with caveats*.  Thoughts?

-Nick

On May 31, 2011, at 10:56 PM, Dave Taht wrote:

> https://github.com/bismark-devel has two repos now.
> 
> To meet requirements of the FCC, would it be sufficient merely to point them at the above url, as we organize and add repositories for bismark-packages, etc?
> 
> On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 11:01 AM, Walter de Donato <walter.dedonato@unina.it> wrote:
> I think I did it.
> Can you please confirm me that everything is ok?
> 
> Walter
> 
> 
> 2011/5/31 Walter de Donato <walter.dedonato@unina.it>
> I think so... 
> I'm currently setting up everything to start importing the Bismark repository.
> 
> 
> 2011/5/31 Nick Feamster <feamster@cc.gatech.edu>
> Do you have access to the "bismark-devel" user on github?
> 
> On May 31, 2011, at 5:35 PM, Walter de Donato wrote:
> 
> > Sold! :-)
> >
> >
> > 2011/5/31 Nick Feamster <feamster@cc.gatech.edu>
> > Yes.  "bismark-firmware" (singular) seems good.
> >
> > On May 31, 2011, at 5:29 PM, Walter de Donato wrote:
> >
> > > Why don't bismark-firmwares?
> > >
> > > Walter
> > >
> > > 2011/5/31 Nick Feamster <feamster@cc.gatech.edu>
> > > Yes, I think perhaps bismark builds could be kept in a separate repo.
> > >
> > > Not sure what we could call that one.  bismark-router?
> > >
> > > -Nick
> > >
> > > On May 31, 2011, at 5:07 PM, Walter de Donato wrote:
> > >
> > > > I usually feel comfortable using GPL licenses.
> > > > I don't know if in this case choosing the Affero GPL would be more appropriate.
> > > > What do you think?
> > > >
> > > > I can try to migrate Bismark to github if Dave didn't start yet doing it.
> > > > Probably Bismark builds should be kept apart from it. Ideas?
> > > >
> > > > Walter
> > > >
> > > > 2011/5/31 Nick Feamster <feamster@cc.gatech.edu>
> > > > for the FCC writeup, the requirements are that the source code is publicly available.
> > > >
> > > > "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."
> > > >
> > > > 1. What license are we going to use?
> > > >
> > > > 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?
> > > >
> > > > For the firmware and management software, I'm actually not sure if the repositories are currently public?
> > > >
> > > > How should we handle this issue?
> > > >
> > > > -Nick
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Bismark-devel mailing list
> > > > Bismark-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
> > > > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bismark-devel
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Walter de Donato, PhD Student
> > > > Dipartimento di Informatica e Sistemistica
> > > > Università  degli Studi di Napoli "Federico II"
> > > > Via Claudio 21 -- 80125 Napoli (Italy)
> > > > Phone: +39 081 76 83821 - Fax: +39 081 76 83816
> > > > Email: walter.dedonato@unina.it
> > > > WWW: http://wpage.unina.it/walter.dedonato
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Walter de Donato, PhD Student
> Dipartimento di Informatica e Sistemistica
> Università  degli Studi di Napoli "Federico II"
> Via Claudio 21 -- 80125 Napoli (Italy)
> Phone: +39 081 76 83821 - Fax: +39 081 76 83816
> Email: walter.dedonato@unina.it
> WWW: http://wpage.unina.it/walter.dedonato
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Walter de Donato, PhD Student
> Dipartimento di Informatica e Sistemistica
> Università  degli Studi di Napoli "Federico II"
> Via Claudio 21 -- 80125 Napoli (Italy)
> Phone: +39 081 76 83821 - Fax: +39 081 76 83816
> Email: walter.dedonato@unina.it
> WWW: http://wpage.unina.it/walter.dedonato
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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