From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31902 invoked by alias); 12 Sep 2003 15:16:47 -0000 Mailing-List: contact ecos-maintainers-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: ecos-maintainers-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 31891 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2003 15:16:46 -0000 Message-ID: <3F61E35B.1030500@eCosCentric.com> Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 15:16:00 -0000 From: Jonathan Larmour User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-GB; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030703 X-Accept-Language: en-gb, en, en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jani Monoses Cc: ecos-maintainers@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFC] lwip officially in ecos? References: <20030912121452.5c29331b.jani@iv.ro> <3F61D493.7070900@eCosCentric.com> <20030912172217.46ded8c2.jani@iv.ro> In-Reply-To: <20030912172217.46ded8c2.jani@iv.ro> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-09/txt/msg00019.txt.bz2 Jani Monoses wrote: > On Fri, 12 Sep 2003 15:13:39 +0100 > Jonathan Larmour wrote: > > >>Jani Monoses wrote: >> >>>Hello all >>> >>>I'd like to ask the maintainers' opinion on putting lwIP in ecos >>>CVS. I'm prepared to do all the legwork if the answer is positive. >>>lwIP is BSD-licensed and almost 'well-established' as the patch >>>submission doc requests. Although I intend to sign a copyright >>>assignment for other future contributions to ecos, IMO lwip is >>>unaffected because it is a separate BSD project but more importantly >>>because my contributions to it are minimal and quite a few people >>>worked on it (not as many as on the BSD stack or microwindows but >>>still) >> >>I'm all for it. I do agree it is well-established enough to waive the >>assignment for lwip itself. Of course changes to things outside of the >>lwIP package itself may be a different story. > > > The only changes outside the package are to io/eth/lwip which is already > in ecos. An assignment for that would be desirable. Would you be prepared to assign to me personally? You may have noticed that the maintainers (save Mark :-)) have not got assignments to Red Hat - we have a mutual agreement to assign to the FSF when that gets finalised (still not done, I'm afraid). If you assigned to one of us, then we can check it in with our copyright, not Red Hat's, and that will become the FSF's later. > A couple of clarifications about the submission: > - files in lwip have a BSD copyright text. I suppose there's no need to > add the ecos copyrigth text in each of them right? Personally I think it would be desirable. The EPK generation script talked about with Andrew could add this as an automated step. This is simply out of the general principle of changes to eCos requiring people to distribute those changes. > - should I send a gzipped patch to ecos-patches or post a link to an EPK > (~200K)? Either is fine. Jifl -- eCosCentric http://www.eCosCentric.com/ The eCos and RedBoot experts --["No sense being pessimistic, it wouldn't work anyway"]-- Opinions==mine