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

[Troy \(Office PC\)]

Ok folks.  We got a access line and CVS set up on a server for all.
Does any one want this to be a go or not?
If so contact address@hidden
He is the guy who can do this.  And it can be done now!

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 Rod
Boyce
Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2002 11:59 AM
To: address@hidden
Cc: address@hidden
Subject: Re: [lwip] LWIP Patches and CVS [contact with Adam]

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.]

[This message was sent through the lwip discussion list.]