[lwip-users] Re: [lwip] LWIP Patches and CVS [contact with Adam]

[Rod Boyce]

I would respectful ask that not everybody who produces a diff has CVS write 
access.  I think there needs to be some gating process as I do not think all 
diffs are created equal.  

lwip and its baby brother are great I think there needs to be a gating process 
so caos does not end up bring king.

Perhaps there should only be a hand full of active people on this list that 
have CVS write access.  These people do not have to test every single patch 
just when there is agreement that a patch should be added to the head should it 
be added.

This is just my $0.02 cents worth.

Regards,
Rod Boyce.

On Thu, 17 Oct 2002 09:57:53 -0700
Scott Robinson <address@hidden> wrote:

> Well, then I guess SF and Savannah aren't accepting it. Florian noted the
> license may have already been changed, and the last nightly CVS I downloaded
> seems to confirm that statement. Perhaps someone should ask again?
> 
> Anyway, I already volunteered server space. It's up to people here if they
> really want to use it.
> 
> I will open my anon CVS open later tonight with preliminary accounts for
> anyone who offers what look like coherent patches. Just give me a yell!
> Setting up a CVS patch mailing list is something else, though...
> 
> Troy, if your CTO ends up allowing you guys to set it up, I'll be able to
> send you a CVS tree (.tgz format) with a few of the patches in mailing list
> archives already applied.
> 
> Scott.
> 
> * Troy (Office PC) translated into ASCII [Wed, Oct 16, 2002 at 05:46:30PM 
> -0700][<address@hidden>]
> > Let me talk to our CTO about setting up something.  
> > 
> > Troy Melquist Founder
> > REDCELLX SOFTWARE
> > www.redcellx.com
> > 408 SW 2nd ave
> > suite 412
> > Portland Oregon 97204 USA
> > 503 295 9680
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: address@hidden [mailto:address@hidden On Behalf Of Leon
> > Woestenberg
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2002 4:40 PM
> > To: address@hidden
> > Subject: Re: [lwip] LWIP Patches and CVS [contact with Adam]
> > 
> > Hello all,
> > 
> > a few weeks ago I have had contact with Adam about setting up a public
> > CVS
> > on http://savanah.nongnu.org (note the nongnu) or
> > http://www.sourceforge.net/
> > 
> > Adam was enthousiastic about it, as he was currently involved in a new
> > project
> > at SICS. (Winternet", http://winternet.sics.se/). I can quote his
> > response
> > tomorrow
> > when I am at my work place again.
> > 
> > Both Savannah and Sourceforge acceptation teams rejected lwIP because of
> > the
> > "original BSD" license.
> > 
> > After this, I have asked Adam if it was possible to blend to the
> > "official
> > modified BSD"
> > license, but I have had no response on this. (This was 1 or 2 weeks
> > ago).
> > Probably,
> > such things have to go through SICS lawyers "layer" anyway.
> > 
> > (In short, the original BSD license was modified by the director of
> > Berkeley
> > University
> > as statement #3 was ambigious in the sense of "contributors").
> > 
> > So, either the license be modified according to this, or someone should
> > set
> > up a CVS
> > server on their _own server_ so that we can proceed with the current
> > license
> > without
> > legal trouble.
> > 
> > Can someone do this? It might be the most viable option.
> > 
> > Regards,
> > 
> > Leon Woestenberg.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > >
> > > > If not, I am thinking about setting up a temporary public CVS which
> > people
> > > > can submit patches for/commit to... (Paul is one person who seems to
> > know
> > > > his stuff)
> > > >
> > > > I'm using lwIP in my main project right now, and until the project
> > is
> > > > converted over to SF.net, it would be nice to know that there is at
> > least
> > > > one comprehensive source for updated/reduced bug code.
> > > >
> > >
> > 
> > 
> > > i don't know if it is a good idea for my patches to go in directly,
> > > since i don't use lwip via the lwip api, but from the low level api.
> > > my patches are untested in this respect, so they should go through
> > > someone who is using lwip standalone, and using lwip with threads etc.
> > >
> > > i am quite prepared to help maintain lwip if api/*.c stuff is
> > > dropped, or at least someone can verify that it still works
> > > after i apply patches
> > >
> > > perhaps go ahead and get the cvs up and cc the announcement to
> > > adam. if he is not responding to mail, perhaps someone in europe
> > > could just phone him to let him know we are stealing his
> > > project  :-)
> > >
> > > in any case he will always have cvs write access of course
> > >
> > > -paul
> > >
> > >
> > > [This message was sent through the lwip discussion list.]
> > >
> > 
> > [This message was sent through the lwip discussion list.]
> > 
> > [This message was sent through the lwip discussion list.]
> 
> -- 
> http://quadhome.com/           - Personal webpage
> tranzoa.net                    - Firewall
> 
> -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
> Version: 3.12
> GAT dpu s: a--- C++ UL+++ P++ L+++ E- W++ N++ o+ K++ w++ 
> O M V(-) PS+ PE Y+ PGP+++ t@ 5 X- R- tv(-) b++++ DI++++ D+ 
> G e* h! r* y 
> ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
> 
[This message was sent through the lwip discussion list.]