On 2014-02-13 10:18, Florian Bruhin wrote:
* Daniel Landau <[email protected]> [2014-02-13 10:00:52 -0600]:
On 2014-02-13 04:27, Florian Bruhin wrote:
>I'm the current maintainer of the pebble-sdk-beta[1] package.
I don't have comments on your actual questions but I do have one of my
own:
[2] claims a license of GPLv3 and [1] claims MIT. I can't find license
information in the SDK tar balls but I do find binaries without
corresponding sources. What's the deal here?
>[1] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/pebble-sdk-beta/
>[2] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/pebble-sdk/
* Taylor Lookabaugh <[email protected]> [2014-02-13
08:10:02 -0800]:
I went as far as looking in the github repository and I'm guessing the
sdk-beta assumed MIT based on this[1] where it says all examples are
released under MIT License.
[1]https://github.com/pebble/pebble-sdk-examples
Yeah, this is just a best guess based on the examples license, and
tools/LICENSE which also says MIT.
As far as I can tell, e.g., the PebbleKit-Android directory has source
code but no license and the Pebble directory (for developing watch
faces?) contains a compiled libpebble.a archive with no source code and
no license.
Daniel
