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.

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

Please clarify licensing of timing/resource/nescore.v #225

Open
DanielG opened this issue Jun 13, 2023 · 3 comments
Open

Please clarify licensing of timing/resource/nescore.v #225

DanielG opened this issue Jun 13, 2023 · 3 comments

Comments

@DanielG
Copy link

DanielG commented Jun 13, 2023

Hi,

I'm working on packaging project trellis for Debian. One of the first steps of doing this is copyright review. I noticed that timing/resource/nescore.v includes a notice stating "This program is GPL Licensed. See COPYING for the full license."

Just "GPL" isn't really very specific it could be any of GPL-{1,2,3}.0-{only,or-later}. However the mentioned COPYING file is nowhere to be found. Now obviously this was copied over from some other project, https://github.com/daveshah1/up5k-demos/tree/master/nes is mentioned at the top so that would be my guess. However that doesn't contain any more specific licensing information either.

Thanks,
--Daniel

@DanielG
Copy link
Author

DanielG commented Aug 25, 2023

I just had prjtrellis REJECTed by Debian ftp-master because of this.

@gatecat can you shed some light on this perhaps?

@gatecat
Copy link
Member

gatecat commented Aug 25, 2023

I'll look into a proper headed, but this file isn't needed at runtime, nor does any content make its way into any file that does in any way that would meaningfully affect copyright or licensing (it's just a test design run through Diamond, with a net and cell delay model extracted from the design that Diamond builds).

@DanielG
Copy link
Author

DanielG commented Aug 25, 2023

It does affect licensing insofar as Debian would be distributing it as part of the source tarball, unfortunately ftp-master is particularly anal about the mere redistribution aspect of copyright.

I just find it disappointing if it's not possible the re-run the fuzzing process using the source tarball from Debian, but you're right ofc. it ultimately doesn't matter and I'm just excluding it from our tarball until this is resolved.

--Daniel

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants