On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 7:14 AM, Shakthi Kannan < > wrote: > I have asked Fedora Legal for feedback. In this regard, if we were to > package VHDL and Verilog cores under an open hardware license, I would > like to know as to how we should package them into FEL? > > For example, if we package opencores.org cores, do we have a naming > convention like opencores.org-<project-name>, and put them under > /usr/share/opencores.org/<project-name>, or just > /usr/share/<project-name>? > > Or, do we need to come up packaging guidelines for hardware designs > that people can use with FEL tools? > > Appreciate your inputs in this regard, Yes indeed this deserves some thinking. Unlike other software and even fonts, these cores have no significant meaning to the users (from a software engineer point of view). They will fall in the same situation as OVM packaging, that is they will be refused during packaging reviews if they can't at least be used _out of the box_ with software distributed by fedora. FYI: OVM was refused because there was no opensource tool to use it. * From a fedora software packaging point of view We have to ensure that these cores can either be compiled with iverilog or ghdl. A script or Makefile should be shipped with the rpm. All proprietary scripts should be in docdir of a subpackage -extra. The advantage of packaging these cores is that once we got one core fully packaged, others will have the same template and it will be very smooth. * From an opensource hardware point of view I agree with your proposed naming convention:opencores.org-<project-name> I would opt of /usr/share/opencores.org/<project-name> as it pays respect to the work opencores.org has done in creating set of guidelines for HDL development, directory structure and community building. We should only compile those cores which are tagged as done/complete. Those cores without documentation are pretty useless for the user. So I would say we should prioritize those having documentation. Prepare a spec file and a SRPM for one of the cores hence we can identify the elements we should pay attention. Last year, I tried to compile a draft template for opencores IP distribution based on the designer's needs. But never got time to complete it http://chitlesh.fedorapeople.org/temp/ I should spend some time to learn how companies are selling their IPs as a distribution point of view and improve that template. Chitlesh _______________________________________________ Fedora-electronic-lab-list mailing list Fedora-electronic-lab-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-electronic-lab-list
