Adding the debian maintainer, and debian-science list to make sure there aren't distribution objections before I start verifying everything.
Some background: I would like to include some vendor specific SPICE models with Qucs, which are not under the GPL, but a license which (I hope) to be compliant to the DFSG. In a recent email, Richard stated: > [snip] but in my view all models which are not compiled and linked into Qucs > may be > considered merely as 'data' which is processed by Qucs. > [snip] > This is especially true with spice models, as in this case Qucs is merely > interpreting a > 'standard interface', the spice model is portable between multiple > simulators, > not tied to just Qucs. The license suggestion is below. Thanks -Robin > -----Original Message----- > From: Getz, Robin [mailto:robin.g...@analog.com] > Sent: Saturday, June 15, 2013 8:04 AM > To: Richard Crozier; qucs-de...@lists.sourceforge.net > Subject: Re: [Qucs-devel] Closed bugs > > Richard: > > The goal is that no changes may be made that affect the performance or > function of the model, which end users think are coming from Analog Devices. > > > What I suggested to our SPICE team was something like: > > -------- > You may include copies of Analog Devices' SPICE models with any software you > sell or distribute. However, you may not make changes to the redistributed > copies of Analog Devices SPICE models other than to: > 1. Include comments. > 2. Change nomenclature so that it will run on Your company's > software/open source software package which you help maintain. > > Any files which have been modified for any reason above, should be clearly > marked (in the header, read me, appropriate software documentation, or file > name change) that this is no longer an Analog Devices Inc verified/original > SPICE > model. > > Any changes beyond the above (which may affect performance or function of > the model) are permitted, but must be distributed as a "patch file" alongside > the > original, unmodified spice model. > > -------- > > Would you suggest anything else? > > > From: Richard Crozier [mailto:r.croz...@ed.ac.uk] > > However, my immediate reaction is that I am not sure about distributing these > models with Qucs, mainly because Users might assume everything that comes > with Qucs is GPL or similar and inadvertently incriminate themselves. Having > looked at the licence you link to, it's not all that permissive in my view, > for > instance: > > "You may include copies of Analog Devices' SPICE models with any software you > sell or distribute. However, you may not make changes to the redistributed > copies of Analog Devices SPICE models other than to: > > 1. Include comments. > 2. Change nomenclature so that it will run on Your company's software. No > changes may be made that affect the performance or function of the model." > > But in principle I see the benefit of distributing these models, and in > practice > think most users would not want to modify them. How about giving us a sense of > what the tweaked licence for the subset of models you are interested in would > be like though > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows: > > Build for Windows Store. > > http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev > _______________________________________________ > Qucs-devel mailing list > qucs-de...@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/qucs-devel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-science-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/feae1c531ee4684ebdd22603ec8be59905f...@nwd2mbx7.ad.analog.com