[dpdk-dev] [PATCH 3/4] doc: Add documents for AMD XGBE Ethernet

Hemant Agrawal hemant.agrawal at nxp.com
Wed Nov 15 01:07:48 CET 2017


HI Greg,
	There is no restriction on sending the code to DPDK for public review and it is up to the respective maintainers to provide comments.

However,  your patches can not be merged to DPDK and it's next trees till the Licensing issues are sorted out. 

Regards,
Hemant


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Shippen, Greg [mailto:Greg.Shippen at amd.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 3:16 PM
> To: Kumar, Ravi1 <Ravi1.Kumar at amd.com>; Thomas Monjalon
> <thomas at monjalon.net>
> Cc: dev at dpdk.org; Hemant Agrawal <hemant.agrawal at nxp.com>
> Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 3/4] doc: Add documents for AMD XGBE
> Ethernet
> 
> Hement:
> 
> I'd like to understand whether we can get dpdk.org some early code for
> review in parallel with our efforts to resolve the licensing issue.  To answer
> this question, I need to understand what happens if we sent you v2 before
> the end of the month?  Is the code visible to all dpdk.org and the public or
> just to internal reviewers?
> 
> Greg
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kumar, Ravi1
> Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 12:36 AM
> To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas at monjalon.net>
> Cc: dev at dpdk.org; Hemant Agrawal <hemant.agrawal at nxp.com>; Shippen,
> Greg <Greg.Shippen at amd.com>
> Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 3/4] doc: Add documents for AMD XGBE
> Ethernet
> 
> >15/09/2017 14:26, Kumar, Ravi1:
> >
> >> >1. As a non-written convention, we are adding following statement in
> >> >the top of such dual licensed files : " This file is provided under
> >> >a dual
> >> >BSD/GPLv2 license. When using or redistributing this file, you may do
> so under either license.". And license header as "BSD LICENSE" or "GPL .."
> >> >
> >> >2. you are using a modified version of BSD. Typical license in DPDK files
> are BSD-3 or BSD-2. If you intend to use your specific version of BSD license,
> it will require TechBoard, Gov Board and legal approval.
> >> >
> >> >3. Additionally your BSD license is including a proprietary license text of
> Synopsys. This will also need approval before it get included in DPDK.
> >> >
> >> >4. It seems you have copy pasted the same license text in all the files.
> >> >e.g. do you intend to keep dual license option + Synopsys text for your
> documentation and the files, which you have created originally for dpdk
> only.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Hi Hemant,
> >>
> >> Thank you very much for the detailed explanation. We have to work with
> our Legal team on this. We will get back to you.
> >
> >Please keep us posted about your legal issues.
> >Maybe there is something we can help.
> >
> >If you target 18.02, I suggest to send a v2 before the end of the month, in
> order to give us time to review what else must be reworked.
> >
> >Thanks
> 
> Thanks for following up on this.
> 
> The AMD legal team is working with Synopsys legal team on this as both
> the companies licenses are involved. Thats why it is taking longer than
> expected.
> We are working hard to meet the month end deadline and want to target
> 18.02.
> 
> Regards,
> Ravi


More information about the dev mailing list