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

[Walter de Donato]

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

Walter

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

> I think so...
> I'm currently setting up everything to start importing the Bismark
> repository.
>
>
> 2011/5/31 Nick Feamster <feamster at 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 at 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 at 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 at 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 at 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 at 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 at 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 at unina.it
WWW: http://wpage.unina.it/walter.dedonato
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/bismark-devel/attachments/20110531/1178e4ff/attachment-0002.html>