Hi, I've been trying to sync out vidix with the CVS versions, just to see that some of our files are newer (e.g. unichrome_vid), some are older and some a completely different! And most of the changes are only cosmetics. So what to do about it?? Greetings, Reimar Döffinger
On Thursday 01 September 2005 11:37, Reimar Döffinger wrote:
Hi, I've been trying to sync out vidix with the CVS versions, just to see that some of our files are newer (e.g. unichrome_vid), some are older and some a completely different! And most of the changes are only cosmetics. So what to do about it??
I tryed to do it a while back but run out of interest. Back then I tryed to get our changes into vidix cvs in order to import the complete tree. As far as I remember nvidia_vid sis_vid cyberblade_vid pm2_vid pm3_vid savage_vid can be used directly from vidix cvs genfb should be removed in vidix cvs unichrome_vid was commited with lots of cosmetics to vidix cvs, the main differences are the missing doxygen comments radeon, mach and mga vid of mplayer cvs lack busmastering I synced vidix.sf.nets pci.db a while back to a newer one. I think some of the driver pci ids have to be updated when syncing radeon, mach and mga_vid. We also need to sync libdha. Ours is lacking dma support, but is working on more platforms (windows) Also note that vidix.sf.net has changed its license. Regards Sascha
On Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 05:26:03PM +0200, Sascha Sommer wrote:
On Thursday 01 September 2005 11:37, Reimar Döffinger wrote:
I've been trying to sync out vidix with the CVS versions, just to see that some of our files are newer (e.g. unichrome_vid), some are older and some a completely different! And most of the changes are only cosmetics. So what to do about it??
I tryed to do it a while back but run out of interest. Back then I tryed to get our changes into vidix cvs in order to import the complete tree. As far as I remember nvidia_vid sis_vid cyberblade_vid pm2_vid pm3_vid savage_vid
can be used directly from vidix cvs genfb should be removed in vidix cvs unichrome_vid was commited with lots of cosmetics to vidix cvs, the main differences are the missing doxygen comments
radeon, mach and mga vid of mplayer cvs lack busmastering
I synced vidix.sf.nets pci.db a while back to a newer one. I think some of the driver pci ids have to be updated when syncing radeon, mach and mga_vid. We also need to sync libdha. Ours is lacking dma support, but is working on more platforms (windows)
I'm very much in favor of syncing with vidix.sf.net as far as possible. We could start by importing the cosmetic changes into our tree, this will make the next syncing steps easier.
Also note that vidix.sf.net has changed its license.
What did they do exactly? Diego
Hi,
Also note that vidix.sf.net has changed its license.
What did they do exactly?
vidix.sf.net is LGPL now. At least the lib
And how they think they can do this without asking the other contributors? For example I did a lot there as well in the past. And didt got any mail about it... -- Alex Beregszaszi email: alex@fsn.hu Free Software Network cell: +36 70 3144424
Hi,
I've been trying to sync out vidix with the CVS versions, just to see that some of our files are newer (e.g. unichrome_vid), some are older and some a completely different! And most of the changes are only cosmetics. So what to do about it??
I planned to sync our vidix and vidix.sf.net after finished uha (look at mplayerhq.hu/homepage/uha). -- Alex Beregszaszi email: alex@fsn.hu Free Software Network cell: +36 70 3144424
Hi, On Sun, Sep 04, 2005 at 09:47:45AM +0200, Alex Beregszaszi wrote:
I planned to sync our vidix and vidix.sf.net after finished uha (look at mplayerhq.hu/homepage/uha).
If they went LGPL this does not seem possible to me, we might only merge their improvements into our code, but it seems mostly their libdha is more recent whereas the drivers seem to be behind. Greetings, Reimar Döffinger
Hi,
I planned to sync our vidix and vidix.sf.net after finished uha (look at mplayerhq.hu/homepage/uha).
If they went LGPL this does not seem possible to me, we might only merge their improvements into our code, but it seems mostly their
But again, how they can switch the license without asking other authors, like me? So we can definitely sync it back.
libdha is more recent whereas the drivers seem to be behind.
-- Alex Beregszaszi email: alex@fsn.hu Free Software Network cell: +36 70 3144424
On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 10:11:12PM +0100, Alex Beregszaszi wrote:
I planned to sync our vidix and vidix.sf.net after finished uha (look at mplayerhq.hu/homepage/uha).
If they went LGPL this does not seem possible to me, we might only merge their improvements into our code, but it seems mostly their
But again, how they can switch the license without asking other authors, like me? So we can definitely sync it back.
They can't and if they have done so behind your back maybe it's time to send them an angry mail. In any case LGPL --> GPL is explicitly allowed in the LGPL, so syncing their changes should not be a problem. Diego
Hi, On Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 12:18:43AM +0100, Diego Biurrun wrote:
On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 10:11:12PM +0100, Alex Beregszaszi wrote:
But again, how they can switch the license without asking other authors, like me? So we can definitely sync it back.
They can't and if they have done so behind your back maybe it's time to send them an angry mail.
see http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/vidix/vidix/NEWS?rev=1.2&view=markup I have no clue what "added new licence: LGPL" is supposed to mean though. Intelligently it does not have a README file, so it's hard to find out what it is supposed to apply to - actually after grepping through the source tree, I did not find a single reference to the LGPL except that one (and grepping for "Lesser" does not give any results outside the license text itself either). This definitly is very weird. Greetings, Reimar Döffinger
On Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 12:47:25AM +0100, Reimar Döffinger wrote:
On Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 12:18:43AM +0100, Diego Biurrun wrote:
On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 10:11:12PM +0100, Alex Beregszaszi wrote:
But again, how they can switch the license without asking other authors, like me? So we can definitely sync it back.
They can't and if they have done so behind your back maybe it's time to send them an angry mail.
see http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/vidix/vidix/NEWS?rev=1.2&view=markup I have no clue what "added new licence: LGPL" is supposed to mean though. Intelligently it does not have a README file, so it's hard to find out what it is supposed to apply to - actually after grepping through the source tree, I did not find a single reference to the LGPL except that one (and grepping for "Lesser" does not give any results outside the license text itself either). This definitly is very weird.
Yes. I've CCed Mans Rullgard to this mail, he works on the vidix.sf.net project. Mans, maybe you can shine some light on the situation? Diego
Diego Biurrun said:
On Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 12:47:25AM +0100, Reimar Döffinger wrote:
On Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 12:18:43AM +0100, Diego Biurrun wrote:
On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 10:11:12PM +0100, Alex Beregszaszi wrote:
But again, how they can switch the license without asking other authors, like me? So we can definitely sync it back.
They can't and if they have done so behind your back maybe it's time to send them an angry mail.
see http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/vidix/vidix/NEWS?rev=1.2&view=markup I have no clue what "added new licence: LGPL" is supposed to mean though. Intelligently it does not have a README file, so it's hard to find out what it is supposed to apply to - actually after grepping through the source tree, I did not find a single reference to the LGPL except that one (and grepping for "Lesser" does not give any results outside the license text itself either). This definitly is very weird.
Yes. I've CCed Mans Rullgard to this mail, he works on the vidix.sf.net project. Mans, maybe you can shine some light on the situation?
Some time ago (I can't remember when), Nick wanted to change the license to LGPL, and was trying to get permission from the authors to do so. I agreed to change the license of the parts I contributed. Nick later commited the actual change to CVS, so I assumed he had permission from the other authors. If this was in error, I suggest you contact him about it. -- Måns Rullgård mru@inprovide.com
Hi,
Some time ago (I can't remember when), Nick wanted to change the license to LGPL, and was trying to get permission from the authors to do so. I agreed to change the license of the parts I contributed. Nick later commited the actual change to CVS, so I assumed he had permission from the other authors. If this was in error, I suggest you contact him about it.
I have never been contacted. -- Alex Beregszaszi email: alex@fsn.hu Free Software Network cell: +36 70 3144424
On Sat, Nov 12, 2005 at 03:02:10PM +0100, Alex Beregszaszi wrote:
Some time ago (I can't remember when), Nick wanted to change the license to LGPL, and was trying to get permission from the authors to do so. I agreed to change the license of the parts I contributed. Nick later commited the actual change to CVS, so I assumed he had permission from the other authors. If this was in error, I suggest you contact him about it.
I have never been contacted.
Alex, have you ever spoken to Nick about this? Diego
Hi,
Some time ago (I can't remember when), Nick wanted to change the license to LGPL, and was trying to get permission from the authors to do so. I agreed to change the license of the parts I contributed. Nick later commited the actual change to CVS, so I assumed he had permission from the other authors. If this was in error, I suggest you contact him about it.
I have never been contacted.
Alex, have you ever spoken to Nick about this?
Sorry, this mail hided in my mailbox until now. No, Nick never asked me about this. Is this only about Vidix or DHA too? However, I allow the change to LGPL of my contributions in the VIDIX codebase. -- Alex
participants (5)
-
Alex Beregszaszi -
Diego Biurrun -
Måns Rullgård -
Reimar Döffinger -
Sascha Sommer