On 2014-11-05, Andreas Bombe wrote: > For the record, the current license (the files in the ghdl source > aren't currently updated to contain this license header) is:
That license only applies to the VHDL-2008 version of the files. GHDL also requires an older version to support VHDL-1987 and VHDL-1993. The new license does not apply to older versions. Then there are the VITAL packages. The files do not contain copyright statements, but that does not mean they are free. > Possibility A) The license does not matter because the spec files > (again, I assume bodies are not compiled) are not copyrightable due to > lack of creativity. No, function bodies are actually compiled and used. They do lack creativity, though. > Possibility C) Let's write our own uncreative spec files adhering to > the standard. A bit of work, but we wouldn't depend on any legal > interpretation and the compiled simulations are also unquestionably > distributable. I think it can be done. The traditional way to do this is in a team: person A dives into the IEEE files to write natural-language specifications and test benches, while person B writes a clean VHDL implementation without ever looking at the IEEE files. > Possibility D) We may distribute, but the files aren't DFSG free, so > put the ghdl package in Debian's non-free section. Still problematic because binary packages contain compiled libraries. Still problematic for the VHDL-1993 version and VITAL packages. Joris. _______________________________________________ Ghdl-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/ghdl-discuss
