From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1433 invoked by alias); 21 Feb 2002 23:20:26 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cgen-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cgen-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 1261 invoked from network); 21 Feb 2002 23:20:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO miranda.axis.se) (193.13.178.2) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 21 Feb 2002 23:20:22 -0000 Received: from ignucius.axis.se (root@ignucius.axis.se [10.13.1.18]) by miranda.axis.se (8.12.1/8.12.1/Debian -5) with ESMTP id g1LNKCDi012736; Fri, 22 Feb 2002 00:20:12 +0100 Received: (from hp@localhost) by ignucius.axis.se (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian 8.9.3-21) id AAA21321; Fri, 22 Feb 2002 00:20:12 +0100 Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 15:20:00 -0000 Message-Id: <200202212320.AAA21321@ignucius.axis.se> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson To: fche@redhat.com CC: hans-peter.nilsson@axis.com, cgen@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: <20020221175258.B28209@redhat.com> (fche@redhat.com) Subject: Re: Terms for new port and other larger submissions? X-SW-Source: 2002-q1/txt/msg00058.txt.bz2 > Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 17:52:58 -0500 > From: "Frank Ch. Eigler" > On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 11:20:35PM +0100, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > > In due time, I believe Axis will offer a CGEN description for > > the CRIS CPU core family. It would be nice if it could be > > distributed together with the other CGEN sources. [...] > > We're discussing this general issue internally. Thanks for the heads-up! > One point though > is clear: you need to think about what is to happen to the files > generated from your cpu description. Their inclusion in (C)FSF > packages like binutils may be difficult if Axis is to keep that > copyright too. Binutils might be a bad example (there's already a non-CGEN port); let's say sim (gdb) instead. Assigning copyright to the FSF is no problem. (There's a blanket assignment in place and no problem assigning copyright for new (C)FSF packages if requested.) Assigning copyright to another company is a problem. I'm a bit puzzled: does someone think including generated files in (C)FSF packages would be less difficult if copyright for the CGEN CPU description is assigned to Red Hat, as was requested in the reference? brgds, H-P