Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

clean up license headers #392

Closed
LudwigKnuepfer opened this issue Nov 29, 2013 · 52 comments · Fixed by #4681 or #4703
Closed

clean up license headers #392

LudwigKnuepfer opened this issue Nov 29, 2013 · 52 comments · Fixed by #4681 or #4703
Assignees
Labels
Type: bug The issue reports a bug / The PR fixes a bug (including spelling errors) Type: enhancement The issue suggests enhanceable parts / The PR enhances parts of the codebase / documentation

Comments

@LudwigKnuepfer
Copy link
Member

There exist various license headers throughout RIOTs sources. Also some files don't have license headers at all.

  • Unify all lgpl license headers.
  • Unify all 'other license' headers for each other license.
  • Identify files without licenses, contact their original authors and get them to explicitly license the respective files under the lgplv2. (see license issues in RIOT #560)
@miri64
Copy link
Member

miri64 commented Jan 31, 2014

PR #590 and #591 are related

@Kijewski
Copy link
Contributor

Do you have a proper grep at the ready to test if this is solved?

@mehlis
Copy link
Contributor

mehlis commented May 5, 2014

I vote for closing this, because I think we have done your job for core and sys....

@LudwigKnuepfer
Copy link
Member Author

@Kijewski I don't have a grep ready..

@LudwigKnuepfer
Copy link
Member Author

working on it

@LudwigKnuepfer
Copy link
Member Author

@mehlis DO NOT CLOSE THIS ISSUE!

It is all still a mess.

@LudwigKnuepfer
Copy link
Member Author

Should I create a PR for this? https://github.com/LudwigOrtmann/RIOT/tree/licenses

@thomaseichinger
Copy link
Member

@LudwigOrtmann go for it

@LudwigKnuepfer
Copy link
Member Author

#1181

@OlegHahm
Copy link
Member

#1181 is not tagged for the release -> untag this one as well?

@LudwigKnuepfer
Copy link
Member Author

Untag

@OlegHahm OlegHahm modified the milestones: Release NEXT MAJOR, Release 2014.05 May 21, 2014
thomaseichinger added a commit to thomaseichinger/RIOT that referenced this issue May 25, 2014
thomaseichinger added a commit to thomaseichinger/RIOT that referenced this issue May 27, 2014
thomaseichinger added a commit that referenced this issue May 27, 2014
boards: cpu: cleanup licenses to fix #392
@thomaseichinger
Copy link
Member

@LudwigOrtmann should (finally) be fixed with #1217, reopen if you disagree

@LudwigKnuepfer
Copy link
Member Author

The unification part is incomplete

@LudwigKnuepfer LudwigKnuepfer reopened this Jun 2, 2014
@OlegHahm OlegHahm modified the milestones: FIX ME FIRST, Release NEXT MAJOR Jun 3, 2014
@LudwigKnuepfer
Copy link
Member Author

boards/x86-multiboot-common/include/multiboot.h is GPL licensed - @Kijewski do you have any suggestion how to resolve it?

@Kijewski
Copy link
Contributor

We could ignore it?

@LudwigKnuepfer
Copy link
Member Author

ignore != resolve..

@OlegHahm
Copy link
Member

We're down to 4:
boards/x86-multiboot-common/include/multiboot.h is GPL licensed - no idea how to handle this.
cpu/lpc2387/include/lpc23xx.h doesn't give any license (only "All rights reserved.") - we should check if we can figure out if NXP specifies a license for that file somewhere.
cpu/stm32f1/include/stm32f10x.h is under "CMSIS license" - why do we have this only for the F0?
tests/unittests/map.h looks like MIT - should be fine!?

@LudwigKnuepfer
Copy link
Member Author

@haukepetersen Can you share some wisdom regarding cpu/stm32f1/include/stm32f10x.h?

@haukepetersen
Copy link
Contributor

I did not add that file... :-). But by looking at it, it seems to me that it does not have a license. Not sure what to do here. I guess we could i) contact ST, ii) ignore the file, iii) do something else? No idea...

@LudwigKnuepfer
Copy link
Member Author

So there is no possibility to replace it with one that comes with a license?

@Kijewski
Copy link
Contributor

I could delete the file multiboot.h and only keep the definition of multiboot_header_t, and use bare numbers instead of the defines MULTIBOOT_HEADER_MAGIC, MULTIBOOT_HEADER_FLAGS and MULTIBOOT_HEADER_CHECKSUM. But actually I just would ignore the license for that particular file. I don't think that multiboot.h can force the GPL. It only contains facts, no logic.

@N8Fear
Copy link

N8Fear commented Nov 24, 2014

What about using version 3.6.1 (read http://chmorgan.blogspot.de/2013/05/watch-out-for-out-of-date-stm32.html ). It has a license attached to it but doesn't seem to be officially released (though it's available for example via github)? I don't know if it is "drop in" or if it requires additional work, though...
As stated in the linked post: the license should allow getting it via github....

@OlegHahm
Copy link
Member

cpu/lpc2387/include/lpc23xx.h doesn't give any license (only "All rights reserved.") - we should check if we can figure out if NXP specifies a license for that file somewhere.

mbed uses the same header file and states that the "the code in this repository is Apache licensed", so I guess it should be safe for us to add this license header, too. Does anyone disagree?

@LudwigKnuepfer
Copy link
Member Author

nay yes (see #2079)

@LudwigKnuepfer
Copy link
Member Author

As of today (no change):

$ ./dist/tools/licenses/check.sh 
file has an unknown license header: 'boards/x86-multiboot-common/include/multiboot.h'
file has an unknown license header: 'cpu/lpc2387/include/lpc23xx.h'
file has an unknown license header: 'cpu/stm32f1/include/stm32f10x.h'
file has an unknown license header: 'tests/unittests/map.h'

@LudwigKnuepfer
Copy link
Member Author

I'm not going to work on this anytime soon.

@LudwigKnuepfer
Copy link
Member Author

For the record - the state of the issue:

$ ./dist/tools/licenses/check.sh
file has an unknown license header: 'boards/x86-multiboot-common/include/multiboot.h'
file has an unknown license header: 'cpu/stm32f1/include/stm32f10x.h'
file has an unknown license header: 'tests/unittests/map.h'

@miri64
Copy link
Member

miri64 commented Jan 23, 2016

  • boards/x86-multiboot-common/include/multiboot.h is GPLv2+
  • cpu/stm32f1/include/stm32f10x.h seems to be a proprietary license digged into the doxygen
  • tests/unittests/map.h Is just another version of MIT

Nothing that isn't fixable :-)

@haukepetersen
Copy link
Contributor

for the stm32f1 this should be fixed with #4681

@miri64
Copy link
Member

miri64 commented Jan 27, 2016

The other ones still remain.

@miri64
Copy link
Member

miri64 commented Jan 28, 2016

Regarding boards/x86-multiboot-common/include/multiboot.h: according to @Kijewski (#4703 (comment)) there is a version with MIT license now: https://www.gnu.org/software/grub/manual/multiboot/html_node/multiboot_002eh.html

@miri64
Copy link
Member

miri64 commented Jan 28, 2016

Finally fixed \o/

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Type: bug The issue reports a bug / The PR fixes a bug (including spelling errors) Type: enhancement The issue suggests enhanceable parts / The PR enhances parts of the codebase / documentation
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

9 participants