Hi,
I’ve not had an extensive look but I note this license in your license file:
LLVM Release License
While a BSD style license (I think) it not listen in Apaches list of compatible
licenses. You’ll also note it include other 3rd party licensed buts of
software, these would need to be checked i
Thanks Justin! This is exactly kind of feedback we are looking for.
The community would like to hold the release to the highest possible
standard, which means we would like to make sure the release meet the
criteria of the standard disclaimer. We will look into the
compatibility issue of LLVM lice
@tqchen , @yzhliu - please send request to review release candidate to dev@
list for TVM because not everyone probably subscribe or follow the Github repo
list.
Before going to general@ list, let's vet and review the release candidate in
the podling community to reduce the noise in the channel.
Thanks Henry This thread is already on dev@ :) — all github thread with RFC and
DEV tags are automatically mirrored at dev@
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-tvm/issues/4259#
To further reduce the noise for our ASF PMC members and mentors, I would
recommend future tag release related thread with [RELEASE] prefix, so our those
who only want to watch related thread can setup email filter to watch this
prefix
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to th
Hi,
I checked the release candidate further:
- Signatures and hashes good
- DISCLAIMER exists
- LICENSE is missing a few things
- NOTICE needs some minor adjustments
- Some files are missing ASF headers e.g. [1][2][3][4][5] (+ others)
- Some files incorrectly have an ASF headers or have ASF lines
Thanks Justin for helping, we'll make modification accordingly.
On Sat, Nov 23, 2019 at 2:15 PM Justin Mclean wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I checked the release candidate further:
> - Signatures and hashes good
> - DISCLAIMER exists
> - LICENSE is missing a few things
> - NOTICE needs some minor adjustment
Hi Justin,
for ./3rdparty/compiler-rt/builtin_fp16.h , from
[here](https://github.com/llvm-mirror/compiler-rt/blob/master/LICENSE.TXT#L240-L241)
it says it was dual licensed under University of Illinois and the MIT
license, though the current LICENSE file declares ALv2. I believe the
builtin_fp16.
Re LLVM’s license issue. I believe MIT is a safer choice for compiler-rt
before we confirm with ASF.
Because strictly LLVM’s apache license comes with an exemption Clause which
needs to be reviewed. Given that the code is also dual licensed under MIT,
we should take that as a safer choice until we
Thanks, @tqchen, Yes, I just noticed the emails also sent to dev@ list too :+1:
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-tvm/issues/4259#issuecomment-557856274
Closed #4105.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-tvm/issues/4105#event-2825758382
11 matches
Mail list logo
