Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: irsim - Switch-level simulator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226715 ------- Additional Comments From cgoorah@xxxxxxxxxxxx 2007-02-03 06:06 EST ------- (In reply to comment #7) > Well, for -2.1: > > * License: > I doubt that this is licensed under GPL. > All texts which include explicit license terms > refer to the same sentences, however, I just > don't know how this license is called... > Please check: > ./analyzer/anXhelper.c for example. > (Note: license for files created by autotools > should be ignored). > under scripts/irsim.spec.in you will see GPL. However, I've asked upstream for more clarity on this. Here is what he answered: ------------- The only copyright notices that appear are in the C code itself. For a typical example (they're all the same as far as I saw): /base/rsim.c has the following copyright notice: ********************************************************************* * Copyright (C) 1988, 1990 Stanford University. * * Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this * * software and its documentation for any purpose and without * * fee is hereby granted, provided that the above copyright * * notice appear in all copies. Stanford University * * makes no representations about the suitability of this * * software for any purpose. It is provided "as is" without * * express or implied warranty. Export of this software outside * * of the United States of America may require an export license. * ********************************************************************* >From my meager understanding of software copyright law, the fact that the Stanford copyright is less restrictive than GPL means that the GPL license may be applied to the package without any problem. I can add the standard GPL copyright notice to the distribution, if you would like. Regards, Tim ------ So eventually, I asked him to add the GPL notice to the package. > * Some documentation > I wonder if the 3 documentation > ----------------------------------------- > /usr/lib/irsim/doc/irsim-analyzer.doc > /usr/lib/irsim/doc/irsim.doc > /usr/lib/irsim/doc/netchange.doc > ----------------------------------------- > are really needed because: > * they are the same as man pages installed. > * it seems that they are not used at runtime. > You are right about it, I'll remove them. > ? Would you give me some examples so that > I can check if this program works well? > > ? I just wonder if the following compilation flag is > proper: > --------------------------------- > DPACKAGE_BUGREPORT=\"magic-hackers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx\" > --------------------------------- > Should this be your mail address? > I'll point it to http://bugzilla.redhat.com > ? By the way, what are the files under other/ > directory? Generally in this type of packages, they are contributed codes that - we don't know their license - they are not currently maintained - we don't know about their accuracy/precision on their methods -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review