incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sterling Hughes <>
Subject Re: Release dependant on LGPL
Date Fri, 19 Feb 2016 15:43:46 GMT

On 2/19/16 6:15 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 5:46 AM, Greg Stein <> wrote:
>> ...Speaking as an IPMC Member, and a Mynewt Mentor … yes, this is fine with a
>> disclaimer in the release notes....
> Except we don't have a standard for release notes, so how about we
> require a mention in the DISCLAIMER file that incubating releases are
> required to include?
> Something like "This release is not fully compliant with Apache
> release policy and includes..." in that file.

That would be fine with us. The main point of this release was to 
familiarize ourself with the process, and find out all the warts. We 
have a beta2 planned shortly afterwards, where we will clean up 
everything we found going through beta1 (which seems doable.)

We'd like to go ahead, just so we've put it through the paces prior to 
our next beta, and we have the full list of things we need to improve.

As a quick summary on the license front, we've found:

- We have some Go LGPL dependencies in our build tool that need to ... 
go...  This is a day's worth of work, unfortunately because of where 
they are in the dependency chain.

- (more serious) Some of the chip vendor license headers have a modified 
3-clause BSD license for their driver headers.  They end up being some 
derivant of:

"4.	This software, including modifications and/or derivative works of 
this software, must execute solely and exclusively on microcontroller or 
microprocessor devices manufactured by or for STMicroelectronics."

That's obviously not kosher.  We have two potential remedies, which 
we'll need to work through prior to next release:

1- Many of these vendors seem to have the same header files licensed 
many ways, depending on version and phase of the moon.  Sometimes the 
exact same files are available straight up BSD.  We'll move to those 
where possible.

2- For ones that aren't, Newt has a package search and install tool. 
These files are in packages that only need to be included when building 
for that platform (and therefore compliant with the license.)  We can 
break these out and host them on Github, and people can search for and 
install them.We've done this with one of the packages as a test for this 

3- We'll work with the chip vendors and ask them to re-license their 
files.  This will be a slower process, but many of them are actually 
excited about Mynewt, and may be receptive.



To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message