[coreboot] Depthcharge License

[tturne at codeaurora.org]

On 2017-12-24 05:27, Ivan Ivanov wrote:
> This commit got merged and the Depthcharge now should have the
> requested license files
> at its root directory. Dear friend, please let us learn about your
> device once it is released,
> maybe some of the coreboot developers would want to get your device -
> to use, and possibly help
> 
> Best regards,
> Ivan Ivanov
> 

Forgive my lack of list etiquette.
With this commit, my legal department is satisfied and has given 
engineering the green light.
Will share details on project as and when I can.
Thanks all who responded and contributed to resolving issue raised by 
this thread.
Cheers,
T.mike

> 2017-12-21 21:34 GMT+03:00 Aaron Durbin via coreboot 
> <coreboot at coreboot.org>:
>> https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromiumos/platform/depthcharge/+/837589
>> 
>> On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 11:14 AM, <tturne at codeaurora.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>> On 2017-12-19 09:53, David Hendricks wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> To be fair, it appears that many source files refer to a 
>>>> non-existent
>>>> LICENSE file. Someone on the CrOS team should probably just add the
>>>> LICENSE file for depthcharge and/or contact mal@ to see how the
>>>> license info is being collected these days (e.g. for
>>>> chrome://os-credits [3]).
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> Thanks for the input on the DC licensing, and because lawyers are 
>>> involved
>>> I need to ask a direct question.
>>> Can a Depthcharge maintainer (anybody who has +2 gerrit authority 
>>> would
>>> suffice) state on this thread
>>> that the Depthcharge project license is GPLv2 (or later)?
>>> 
>>> I know this feels redundant and that the question has been asked and
>>> answered, I'm just trying
>>> to satisfy our internal legal group.
>>> 
>>> Per David's point above, this direct question would not be required 
>>> to
>>> satisfy the lawyers
>>> if a top-level COPYING or LICENSE file is added to Depthcharge.  
>>> Which I
>>> will be happy to
>>> add once I'm able to start contributing to the project.
>>> Cheers,
>>> T.mike
>>> 
>>>> On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 9:19 AM, ron minnich <rminnich at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Is there even a question? Looks like aaron just answered the
>>>>> original question, which boils down to Read The Source?
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 7:58 AM Aaron Durbin via coreboot
>>>>> <coreboot at coreboot.org> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 8:03 AM, <tturne at codeaurora.org> wrote:
>>>>> On 2017-12-15 13:39, tturne at codeaurora.org wrote:
>>>>> Preparing to mirror the coreboot.org [1] requires us to vet the
>>>>> various
>>>>> licenses, etc.
>>>>> 
>>>>> There doesn't appear to be a LICENSE or COPYING file in the
>>>>> Depthcharge tree.
>>>>> 
>>>>> My understanding is that Depthcharge is licensed GPLv2 (or later).
>>>>> 
>>>>> How would I confirm this with an online source?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> T.mike
>>>>> 
>>>>> Should this query be posted on Chromium list rather than Coreboot
>>>>> list?
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Probably. The files in the depthcharge repository  have licenses at
>>>> the top of each file. They are GPLv2.
>>>> 
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> T.mike
>>>>> 
>>>>> --
>>>>> coreboot mailing list: coreboot at coreboot.org
>>>>> https://mail.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot [2]
>>>> 
>>>>  --
>>>> coreboot mailing list: coreboot at coreboot.org
>>>> https://mail.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot [2]
>>>> --
>>>> coreboot mailing list: coreboot at coreboot.org
>>>> https://mail.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot [2]
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Links:
>>>> ------
>>>> [1] http://coreboot.org
>>>> [2] https://mail.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
>>>> [3] https://www.chromium.org/chromium-os/licenses
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> coreboot mailing list: coreboot at coreboot.org
>> https://mail.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot