[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Savannah-hackers] blueos

From: Sylvain BEUCLER
Subject: Re: [Savannah-hackers] blueos
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 22:46:25 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/

As we have not had a response from you, we have deleted your project
from the pending queue.  If you would still like to have your project
hosted at Savannah, please re-submit it for evaluation.



On Sat, Aug 07, 2004 at 11:18:32AM +0200, Sylvain Beucler wrote:
> Hi,
> I'm evaluating the project you submitted for approval in Savannah.
> >BlueEyed OS
> >
> >Project Admins:
> >Guillaume Maillard <address@hidden> ;
> >
> >Registration Date:
> >Sun 01/25/2004 at 19:59
> >
> >System Group Name:
> >blueos
> >
> >Submitted Description:
> >
> >The project is mainly a creation of a new operating system based on
> >a linux kernel. It has a complete C++ API and a multithreaded
> >approach which result of impressive performance. It comes from a
> >closed source project which is now LGPL. You can look at
> > for more informatique. A snapshot of the
> >source code is available at:
> >
> >
> >Required software:
> >libjpeg linux kernel gcc
> >
> >Other comments:
> We do not host distributions of operating systems, mainly because of
> space and bandwidth constraints. Also, we prefer to have an
> aggregation of work split into different projects.
> However, your project seems pretty small, and I am not sure on whether
> it could be easily split into different projects.
> Let's say that if you think your project will stay as small (< 10M) as
> is it now, it will not worth splitting it.
> I see that your project contains a lot of separate projects. If some
> of them are available somewhere else, and unless you are their current
> maintainer, maybe it would be better not to host them at Savannah (you
> could still include them in releases). I mainly think of the code
> examples, and the 'stubgen' tool.
> Can you detail that point so we can decide whether or not to split the 
> project into several accounts?
> On to licensing issues:
> Before releasing your project under the LGPL, please place
> copyright notices and permission to copy statements at the beginning
> of every file of source code.  In addition, if you haven't already, 
> please copy a copy of the plain
> text version of the LGPL, available from
> (, into a file named "COPYING".
> Additional instructions are available from
> The GPL FAQ explains why these procedures must be followed.  To learn
> why a copy of the LGPL must be included with every copy of the code,
> for example, go to
> Some files owned by Be, Inc, do not have clear notice statement (only a
> copyright statement), for example those in headers/be. Can you add a
> license notice to these files, so we can check for (L)GPL-compatiblity
> issues?
> FlexLexer.h in headers/gnu is released under the old BSD license,
> which is incompatible with the GPL. All files (C) The Regents of the
> University of California should now be available under a modified BSD
> license that removes the old-fanishioned and problematic advertising
> clause. Please replace this file with one released under a
> GPL-compatible license.
> We also need to know the license of ttfonts.
> Files under the Be Sample Code License (and marked as such) are
> compatible with the (L)GPL and do not need additional work.
> There are a lot of other files that miss license and copyright notices. 
> Please fix those. Keep in mind that:
> 1) we only host code compatible with the GNU GPL
> 2) we will check all your source files :)
> 3) I used the old tarball you uploaded at your account. If you 
> have an updated version (even non functional), please send it.
> Regards,
> -- 
> Sylvain
> On 2004.07.30 23:53 Guillaume Maillard wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >We are still waiting for a repository, don't forgot us!
> >The B.E.OS project, aka blueos still need a public cvs
> >to go further in the development.
> >
> >Regards,

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]