On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 9:42 PM John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi > > +1 binding from me, with a couple of notes: > > - it could be how I'm extracting your source tars, but the packages are > ending up in a directory child to it. We typically look for the > LICENSE/NOTICE/DISCLAIMER in the root folder. Do you mean that you get: nuttx/LICENSE or <some_other_dir>/nuttx/LICENSE If it's the first case, I think that's usually desirable because otherwise the users may untar expecting to get one folder with all the contents in it, but end up getting a bunch of directories and files instead. When that happens in a directory containing many other files, it creates a big mess. Also as NuttX needs nuttx/ and apps/ to be sibling directories, it might be confusing if there's no enclosing directory. (The apps/ distribution provided by our project is optional and the user may substitute their own.) If it's the second case, then I agree we should fix it. What incantation are you using to extract the contents? More below: - I'm ok with the LICENSE but would like you all to fix this section at > some point: > > > uIP > > === > > > Many lower-level networking components of NuttX derive from uIP which > > has a similar BSD style license: > > > Copyright (c) 2001-2003, Adam Dunkels. > > All rights reserved. > > > Rhombus Math Library > > ==================== > > > The math library used in NuttX derives from the Rhombus OS by Nick Johnson > > (with many, many addtions). The Rhombus OS is/was distributed under the > ISC > > license. The ISC licsense is a permissive license that allows people do > > anything with your code with proper attribution and without warranty. The > > ISC license is functionally equivalent to the BSD 2-Clause and MIT > licenses, > > removing some language that is no longer necessary. > > > IGMP > > ==== > > > IGMP support, if enabled, adds additional logic by Steve Reynolds: > > > Copyright (c) 2002 CITEL Technologies Ltd. > > All rights reserved. > > > This should ideally list out the actual license contents instead of an > explanation of what the license is. Good catch! We'll fix it. Thank you for your feedback, Nathan
