Christian Mauderer started a new discussion: 
https://gitlab.rtems.org/rtems/rtos/rtems/-/merge_requests/515#note_124796


The request should be ready now.

I'm not entirely sure about the handling of the license of the imported HAL 
(BSD 3 clause). At the moment, the BSP contains a LICENSE.md file with a list 
of the files under that license. That's similar to some powerpc BSPs, the 
utf8proc, jffs2 or acpica. An alternative would be to add a SPDX identifier to 
the imported sources. But I haven't found another BSP where we modified a HAL 
(or similar library) with SPDX identifiers.

@amar: I was a bit surprised about the result of the format.diff of one of the 
earlier runs (https://gitlab.rtems.org/rtems/rtos/rtems/-/pipelines/2881 to be 
exact). The format.diff showed only a few lines of one of the files that I 
added with the patch set but not all. Is that expected? If not: Should I open a 
ticket in the administration area? The format_full.diff is more what I would 
expect for this patch set.

-- 
View it on GitLab: 
https://gitlab.rtems.org/rtems/rtos/rtems/-/merge_requests/515#note_124796
You're receiving this email because of your account on gitlab.rtems.org.


_______________________________________________
bugs mailing list
bugs@rtems.org
http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/bugs

Reply via email to