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

[Shippen, Greg]

Hemant:

I am working the changes we are asking for on the BSD license.  With respect to the Synopsys license text.  They are telling me that similar header concerns were raised from linux .org and they were OK keeping the header if an author signoff-off text was included.  Would that be sufficient for dpdk.org with respect to the Synopsys text?

Greg

-----Original Message-----
From: Hemant Agrawal [mailto:hemant.agrawal at nxp.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 6:08 PM
To: Shippen, Greg <Greg.Shippen at amd.com>; Kumar, Ravi1 <Ravi1.Kumar at amd.com>; Thomas Monjalon <thomas at monjalon.net>
Cc: dev at dpdk.org
Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 3/4] doc: Add documents for AMD XGBE Ethernet

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