Hi all.

Yes, most likely LGPL + commercial. So, there is no reason to worry.

Best regards,
Denis

14.02.2012, 04:08, [email protected]:
> Given that the QSerialDevice developers have accepted the CLA for the project 
> effective from start of the project, the project is now open for licencing 
> both under LGPL and commercial license; just like any other module in Qt. 
> AFAIK, though IANAL.
>
> --
> Sent from my Nokia N9
>
> On 2/13/12 16:56 ext Angel Perles wrote:
> Hi Denis,
>
> I have a question about the license for QSerialDevice. In gitorious it
> appears as GPLv3.
>
> I think it could be interesting to have a more permisive licensing
> option such as LGPL or BSD. This will allow to push forward this library
> compared with others such as QextSerialPort with not established license.
>
> Others guys and me (users of QextSerialPort) are seeking for an
> appropiate library for collaborating.
>
> Best regards,
> Àngel
>
> El 11/02/12 18:28, Denis Shienkov escribió:
>> Hi all.
>>
>> I prepared for the first QtSerialPort review.
>> But then I do not know what to do:
>> Who will review my changes? Who will do the audit?
>> Someone, please check the code, because I still have not figured much in the 
>> features by:
>> http://wiki.qt-project.org/Creating_a_new_module_or_tool_for_Qt
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Denis
>>
>> 09.02.2012, 23:46, [email protected]:
>>> On 09/02/2012 13:26, ext Denis Shienkov wrote:
>>>
>>>>   Hi Marius.
>>>>
>>>>   I have a few more questions (or offers):
>>>>
>>>>   1) Perhaps, instead of:
>>>>>   ...
>>>>>   and start pushing to refs/for/2.0 to the Gerrit repo.
>>>>>   ...
>>>>   done refs/for/master? Because for the main branch is gerrit master,
>>>>   and not 2.0 (or am I misunderstanding something?).
>>>
>>> Sure, whatever you prefer. Gitorious' 2.0 branch was pushed to both 2.0
>>> and master, since Gerrit requires a 'master' branch. We didn't import
>>> the Gitorious master branch, since I think you only rebased the 2.0
>>> branch to avoid the commits without CLA signoff.
>>>
>>> How you proceed, with commits in the master or 2.0 branch is up to you
>>> as the maintainer.
>>>
>>>>   2) It may be worth in the current repository QSerialDevice Gitorious
>>>>   marked as deprecated (well, or something like that), and instead it
>>>>   create a new one with a new name (ex. QtSerialPort), etc. The reason
>>>>   is that QSerialDevice will not reflect the inner essence, after
>>>>   integration, and will mislead the majority of public users.
>>>
>>> Sure, I agree it's probably cleaner to do that. (Our internal sync
>>> script also infact requires the repositories to be named the same in
>>> Gerrit and in Gitorious.)
>>>
>>>>   3) Let us define - what the class name give, with prefix Qt, Q or no
>>>>   prefix? I looked at some of the projects Gerrit without CI (eg
>>>>   qtprocessmanager, qtjsonstream) and found that a all class names
>>>>   without the prefix. I also stick to this style?
>>>
>>> See
>>> http://wiki.qt-project.org/Creating_a_new_module_or_tool_for_Qt#Using_the_module_name_in_application_code_and_documentation
>>>
>>>       "For Qt Add-On Modules, a C++ namespace is required to avoid class
>>>       naming clashes with other modules in the public API. For the "Qt
>>>       Foo" module the namespace would be QtFoo. Exception: in order to
>>>       keep source compatibility with Qt 4, no namespace is required for
>>>       former Qt 4 modules. When naming classes, the best practice is use
>>>       simple non-prefixed class names within the C++ name space. Naming
>>>       classes of add-ons like QMyClass is also OK."
>>>
>>>>   4) In the header of each source file, keep a reference to the
>>>>   original authors, like me, or mention only Nokia?
>>>
>>> Nokia did not develop the code, and must not be referenced as the
>>> author. Copyright remains with the author.
>>>
>>>>   5) How to make an example of the structure of the project is the
>>>>   addon for QtSerialPort (in order to make the image and likeness),
>>>>   from any Addon-project? Or maybe there is a specific example of a
>>>>   good where to get the project structure for addon?
>>>
>>> http://wiki.qt-project.org/Creating_a_new_module_or_tool_for_Qt#The_structure_of_a_new_module_repository
>>>
>>> --
>>> .marius
>>>
>>>> 08.02.2012, 22:08, [email protected]:
>>>>> On 2/8/12 11:59 AM, "ext Denis Shienkov"<[email protected]>    wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Marius.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I do not understand this bit:
>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> --------------------------
>>>>>> For the other Qt repos we treat the Gitorious repo as "public" repo, so
>>>>>> most people will clone from there. Then we regularly push from Gerrit to
>>>>>> Gitorious to keep them in sync. However, we disable Merge Requests in
>>>>>> Gitorious, since we want to force all contributions through the Gerrit
>>>>>> system.
>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> --------------------------
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ie I and other "special/selected" developers will commits/push to Gerrit,
>>>>>> and then tested and approved by the pieces of code will be sent to
>>>>>> Gitorious?
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, not more "special" than having a Jira/Gerrit account with an
>>>>> accepted CLA agreement :)
>>>>>
>>>>> For the Qt Essential modules we have a script which automatically pushes
>>>>> the latest changes to the Gitorious location. And we prefer most people to
>>>>> use those as the primary clone location, since it offloads much of the
>>>>> resource requirements from the Qt-Project infrastructure.
>>>>>
>>>>>> What then will be a public repo address on Gitorious for get/clone other
>>>>>> people a code libraries?
>>>>>
>>>>> It's up to you really. If you don't want to mirror it to Gitorious on a
>>>>> regular basis, you can just use the Gerrit repo as the primary location,
>>>>> though I think people will need a Jira/Gerrit account to do so? Sergio,
>>>>> can you please confirm or deny that?
>>>>>
>>>>> My recommendation: Keep your Gitorious repo as the "primary" source, and
>>>>> push the 2.0 branch from Gerrit to Gitorious whenever you feel it's stable
>>>>> enough. Then add a notice on the Gitorious project that all development is
>>>>> done at codereview.qt-project.org, and that Merge Requests in Gitorious is
>>>>> therefore disabled.
>>>>>
>>>>> For Qt Essentials, the init-repository script in qt5.git makes the
>>>>> Gitorious repos the 'origin', while Gerrit is the 'gerrit' remotes.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> .marius
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 08.02.2012, 21:37, [email protected]:
>>>>>>> You may now disable/stop using the Gitorious repo, and clone from
>>>>>>> Gerrit,
>>>>>>> and start pushing to refs/for/2.0 to the Gerrit repo. Then those will
>>>>>>> show
>>>>>>> up as review tasks for the 2.0 branch in Gerrit, and you can review it
>>>>>>> there.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Basically, you may now use the Gerrit version as the main repository.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For the other Qt repos we treat the Gitorious repo as "public" repo, so
>>>>>>> most people will clone from there. Then we regularly push from Gerrit to
>>>>>>> Gitorious to keep them in sync. However, we disable Merge Requests in
>>>>>>> Gitorious, since we want to force all contributions through the Gerrit
>>>>>>> system.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> .marius
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2/8/12 11:34 AM, "ext Denis Shienkov"<[email protected]>    wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi Marius.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yes, everything seems fine.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I tried to clone the repository:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> # git clone
>>>>>>>> ssh://codereview.qt-project.org:29418/playground/qtserialport.git
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> and received the 2.0 branch files.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What are is now further action on my part and yours? ie what's next?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>> Denis
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 08.02.2012, 18:37, [email protected]:
>>>>>>>>> Great, thanks.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Denis, let us know if everything looks good on your side.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Sent from my Nokia N9On 2/8/12 8:02 Ahumada Sergio (Nokia-MP/Oslo)
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 02/08/2012 02:57 PM, Storm-Olsen Marius (Nokia-MP/Austin) wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Actually, the master branch has not been rebased to remove the
>>>>>>>>>> commits
>>>>>>>>>> which has no CLA, so we need to remove that branch. Perhaps just make
>>>>>>>>>> the 2.0 branch t the master as well.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Done .. 2.0 from Gitorious is now master in Gerrit
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Sergio Ahumada
>>>>>>>>> Mobile Phones Middleware - Quality Engineering
>>>>>>>>> http://wikis.in.nokia.com/QtQualityEngineering
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Development mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
>
> --
>
> *************************************************************
> Angel F. Perles Ivars
>
> Departament d'Informàtica de Sistemes i Computadors - DISCA
> Universitat Politècnica de València - E.U.Informàtica
> Cami de Vera s/n. 46022-Valencia
> Edifici 1G Despatx 2S-13
> e-mail: [email protected]
> Telf.+34 963877007 Ext. 75775 Fax.+34 963877579
> http://www.disca.upv.es/aperles
> _______________________________________________
> Development mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
_______________________________________________
Development mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Reply via email to