Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Update Zephyr Licensing page #6038

Closed
carlescufi opened this issue Feb 7, 2018 · 16 comments
Closed

Update Zephyr Licensing page #6038

carlescufi opened this issue Feb 7, 2018 · 16 comments
Assignees
@mandarcthorat1
Labels
area: Documentation priority: medium Medium impact/importance bug
Milestone
v1.12.0

Comments

@carlescufi
Copy link
Member

This is missing several of the components in ext/
http://docs.zephyrproject.org/LICENSING.html#zephyr-licensing
@carlescufi carlescufi added bug The issue is a bug, or the PR is fixing a bug area: Documentation labels Feb 7, 2018
@carlescufi carlescufi added this to the v1.11.0 milestone Feb 7, 2018
@dbkinder dbkinder added the priority: high High impact/importance bug label Feb 8, 2018
@nashif nashif added the priority: medium Medium impact/importance bug label Feb 8, 2018
@dbkinder dbkinder removed the priority: high High impact/importance bug label Feb 8, 2018
@dbkinder
Copy link
Contributor

TSC approved Contributing guidelines say all the ext/ components need a README file with specific origin and licensing information. None of them do. There's a template for this README in doc/contribute/code_component_README.

@carlescufi
Copy link
Member Author

@Shilpashree3lc will this be done in time for the scheduled Friday release?

@Shilpashree3lc-zz
Copy link
Contributor

Here is my finding on the external components which are in compliant and not in compliant with the template as of the README in doc/contribute/code_component_README.

ext component Path Comments
st ext/hal/st/stm32cube/stm32f1xx/README Not in Compliant
st ext/hal/st/stm32cube/stm32f4xx/README Not in Compliant
st ext/hal/st/stm32cube/stm32f7xx/README Not in Compliant
st ext/hal/st/stm32cube/stm32f0xx/README Not in Compliant
st ext/hal/st/stm32cube/stm32f3xx/README Not in Compliant
st ext/hal/st/stm32cube/README Not in Compliant
st ext/hal/st/stm32cube/stm32l4xx/README Not in Compliant
st ext/hal/st/lib/sensor/vl53l0x/README Compliant
st ext/hal/st/lib/README Not in compliant
ti ext/hal/ti/simplelink/README Not in compliant
cmsis ext/hal/cmsis/README Not in compliant
silabs ext/hal/silabs/gecko/README Not in compliant
qmsi ext/hal/qmsi/README Not in compliant
nordic ext/hal/nordic/nrfx/README compliant
altera ext/hal/altera/README compliant
nxp ext/hal/nxp/mcux/README Not in compliant
hal ext/hal/README Not in compliant
fat ext/fs/fat/README Not in compliant
fs ext/fs/README Not in compliant
tinycbor ext/lib/encoding/tinycbor/README Not in compliant
tinycrypt ext/lib/crypto/tinycrypt/README Not in Compliant
mbedtls ext/lib/crypto/mbedtls/README Not in Compliant
mcumgr ext/lib/mgmt/mcumgr/README.md Not in compliant
nffs ext/fs/nffs/README.md Not in compliant
atmel ext/atmel No README
esp ext/esp No README

@Shilpashree3lc-zz
Copy link
Contributor

To Start with, I am listing the current status and [Plan]

  1. Only below CI: Test checkpatch #3 are in compliant state – complete in all sense
    a. ext/hal/st/lib/sensor/vl53l0x/README
    b. ext/hal/nordic/nrfx/README
    c. ext/hal/altera/README

  2. Below This is a test commit #2 have all together NO information – [Plan] Suggest to contact the respective external owners here
    a. ext/atmel
    b. ext/esp

  3. Below arch: sam3x: update Kconfig options after move to SAM SoC family tree #21 do have information but NO fully compliant as we expect – [Plan] I can start to work on them, not possible to finish by wk10.5
    a. ext/hal/st/stm32cube/stm32f3xx/README
    b. ext/hal/st/stm32cube/README
    c. ext/hal/st/stm32cube/stm32l4xx/README
    d. ext/hal/st/lib/README
    e. ext/hal/ti/simplelink/README
    f. ext/hal/cmsis/README
    g. ext/hal/silabs/gecko/README
    h. ext/hal/qmsi/README
    i. ext/hal/nxp/mcux/README
    j. ext/hal/README
    k. ext/fs/fat/README
    l. ext/fs/README
    m. ext/lib/encoding/tinycbor/README
    n. ext/lib/crypto/tinycrypt/README
    o. ext/lib/crypto/mbedtls/README
    p. ext/lib/mgmt/mcumgr/README.md
    q. ext/fs/nffs/README.md

@erwango
Copy link
Member

erwango commented Mar 7, 2018 •
edited
Loading

I can help on ST ones.
One question: should all the README be all compliant, even when they are top level but lower level ones are compliant? (eg: ext/hal/st/lib/README)

@erwango
Copy link
Member

erwango commented Mar 7, 2018

It's here for now:
https://github.com/erwango/zephyr/tree/ext_stm32cube_README_fix
Let me know where I should do the pull request

@linkmeyer
Copy link

While the correct formatting of the README files is important and certainly a real bug, I recommend a separate bug be filed for it as the original intent of this issue (as I read it) is to get the License page updated for the 1.11 release.

@Shilpashree3lc-zz
Copy link
Contributor

@linkmeyer I have run the scripts to check for licensing and manually verified them, all the files are in compliant.
The license page is up-to-date. There are no changes needed to the license page.

@carlescufi
Copy link
Member Author

@Shilpashree3lc I don't think the license page is up to date? There are many components in the ext/ folder that are not present in doc/LICENSING.rst

@Shilpashree3lc-zz
Copy link
Contributor

Shilpashree3lc-zz commented Mar 9, 2018 •
edited
Loading

@carlescufi , We do not have to change anything in doc/LICENSING.rst page since there is no change with it, because I couldn't find any files that didn't have license to update them in the page. Hence I meant the license page is up-to-date. Whatever I followed in previous releases, same way I have followed here. If you need anything to be changed please let me know, I can work on it.

@carlescufi
Copy link
Member Author

@Shilpashree3lc so there are 2 different issues here as Mark mentioned:

  1. Update all the README files in ext/ so they comply with the template
  2. Update the doc/LICENSING.rst file so that it lists all the components in ext/

You obviously cannot be expected to do 1. by yourself, but could we at least update doc/LICENSING.rst so that it lists all components in ext/, even if it's only the name of the component and the software license?

@nashif
Copy link
Member

nashif commented Mar 9, 2018

You obviously cannot be expected to do 1. by yourself, but could we at least update doc/LICENSING.rst so that it lists all components in ext/, even if it's only the name of the component and the software license?

This is not needed, the license page is ONLY for components that do not have a license, not for listing everything in ext/. It really has nothing to do with ext/

@nashif
Copy link
Member

nashif commented Mar 9, 2018

the document says that:

The Zephyr kernel tree imports or reuses packages, scripts and other files that are not covered by the Apache 2.0 License. In some places there is no LICENSE file or way to put a LICENSE file there, so we describe the licensing in this document.

@carlescufi carlescufi modified the milestones: v1.11.0, v1.12.0 Mar 9, 2018
@carlescufi
Copy link
Member Author

CC @kestewart

@Shilpashree3lc-zz Shilpashree3lc-zz removed their assignment Apr 13, 2018
@nashif nashif removed the bug The issue is a bug, or the PR is fixing a bug label May 11, 2018
@nashif
Copy link
Member

nashif commented May 11, 2018

not a bug

@MaureenHelm
Copy link
Member

Added item to release checklist in #6533

  • Update doc/LICENSING.rst for new components that do not have a license

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@mandarcthorat1 mandarcthorat1

Labels
area: Documentation priority: medium Medium impact/importance bug
Projects
None yet
Milestone
v1.12.0
Development

No branches or pull requests
8 participants
@nashif @MaureenHelm @linkmeyer @dbkinder @carlescufi @erwango @Shilpashree3lc-zz @mandarcthorat1