#milkymist IRC log for Wednesday, 2011-05-11

wpwrakso some fairy finally granted lekernel's wish ...00:32
wpwrak... and mm1 is being torn apart by the unwashed masses at slashdot ;-)00:33
kristianpaul:O http://hardware.slashdot.org/story/11/05/10/232229/Consumer-Device-With-Open-CPU-Out-of-Beta-Soon01:33
kristianpaulhe, the icon is no what i wished.. but :-)01:33
wpwraknow someone has to explain why this is great. my attempt wasn't so successful, it seems :(01:35
wolfspraulthat icon is fun I think01:47
wolfspraulyou mean this old style cassette player or whatever this is?01:47
kristianpauli just cant image mm1 as a cassete player :-)01:48
kristianpauljust, a personal dislike, thats all :-)01:48
wolfspraulI like it. will catch people attention, and goes in the right direction, music/entertainment01:49
kristianpaulyeah thats true01:49
kristianpaulmay be i'm too biased to other fields01:49
wolfspraulbtw, marketing 101, we should now sit there and reply to every comment, every last one01:49
wolfspraulalways be friendly, thank people for the interest, answer their questions, correct misunderstandings, etc.01:50
wolfspraulso... I'll jump into comment commenting a bit01:52
wolfspraulwpwrak: wanna join?01:52
wolfspraulthere are some nice comments about openmoko even, he :-)01:52
wolfspraullet's show them some looooove01:53
kristianpauli was about to point that (openmoko)01:54
wolfspraulkristianpaul: I'm starting to comment02:02
kristianpaulwich is you? i just found wpwrak comment..02:07
kristianpaullet me check again..02:07
kristianpaulhey you have previous history on \. :-)02:14
kristianpauls/on/at02:14
wolfspraulme? I don't know02:17
wolfspraulI've probably posted slashdot stories in the 90's, yeah02:18
wolfspraulman, I realize something. we need an effective way for those people to follow the project02:18
wolfspraulmaybe we should advertise the twitter feed02:18
wolfspraulthere's a guy who says he found confidential/proprietary marked sources in http://www.milkymist.org/socdist/milkymist-1.0RC3.tar.bz202:21
kristianpaulyeah. thats always the issue with lattice..02:22
kristianpaulis okay said lattice mico32 license is bsd-like?02:23
kristianpaulI'm going to point the thread to this one https://github.com/milkymist/milkymist/blob/master/LICENSE.LATTICE02:23
wolfspraulok but it's not so nice that the header says 'confidential and proprietary', just checking...02:26
kristianpaulyeah, me either, but afaik that always had been there so far i know/remenber02:27
wolfspraulwe can also point him to the lattice url02:30
kristianpauli dunno that url02:36
wolfspraulhe posted it already and didn't like it02:42
wolfspraulbut anyway, that guy was on a rant, let him rant02:42
wolfspraulI'm getting a little tired of unfriendly people. always this bad mood, bah :-)02:42
wolfspraulthis morning there was a woman in front of me at the Starbucks line, the girl initially made the wrong coffee for her, iced instead of hot.02:43
wolfspraulok that can happen02:43
wolfspraulman that woman started to yell around, horrible02:43
wolfspraulnot that the wrong iced coffee wouldn't have been immediately discarded, and she got her hot one, no. but she had to make a point of this opportunity to put someone down, I guess.02:43
wolfspraulI wish there had been some good old French restaurant culture there, and the boss of the restaurant would have returned the money to this guest and kicked her out. only appropriate reaction.02:44
wolfspraulfor the most part I like the comments though02:45
wolfspraulquite a few people get it, and give it the benefit of doubt too.02:45
wolfspraulhopefully we can find a way to make them follow the project somehow02:45
kristianpaulhumm, currently there is not webchat/irc link from milkymist.org isnt?02:47
kristianpaulI will point some people to this chan as well..02:47
wolfspraulgood idea02:48
qwebirc55283test02:49
qwebirc55283ok02:49
wolfspraulthere's a twitter link at the bottom, maybe it can be repeated on top...02:49
wolfspraulok I just did a grep -ir confidental over the source tarball, and indeed - it's in a lot of source files02:51
wolfsprauloh well02:51
kristianpaulyeah :(02:51
kristianpaulit always had been there02:51
wolfspraulof course the license agreement does permit the openess, publication, etc. so it's contradictory. we can safely assume that the license agreement supercedes the confidential & proprietary comment, but it's stupid.02:52
kristianpaulindeed (stupid)02:52
wolfspraulwe should definitely not remove this confidential/proprietary remark, but maybe we can add a line pointing to the license file?02:52
wolfsprauljust the LICENSE.LATTICE file in the tarball02:53
kristianpaula README.LICENSE file in every dir in wich this confidential file is it02:53
wolfspraulmaybe add 1 line right below that license header02:54
kristianpaulpointing the top LICENSE.LATTICE02:54
kristianpaulyup02:54
kristianpaulthats cleaner i think02:54
wolfspraul // Please find the license agreement LICENSE.LATTICE at the root of this source tree.02:55
wpwrakwolfspraul: maybe lekernel can ask lattice about the inconsistent wording ? does he communicate with them about the lm32 ?03:08
thechrisI take it this is where people discuss things including milkymist's HDL?03:09
wolfspraulthechris: yes :-)03:10
wolfspraulwpwrak: we can try, but I doubt we will get much out of them. Lattice went to many changes/restructurings.03:10
wolfspraulthrough many03:10
wolfspraulso whatever manager or theory was behind the open sourcing back then, I doubt you will find anyone today who still cares even03:10
thechrisah, well, as I mentioned in qi-hardware, I found a few simulator bugs in the tmu2 code.03:11
wolfspraulthat's my take, I won't waste time on this03:11
wolfsprauleither we have a legally strong open sourcing in the past (which I think we have), or we are screwed :-)03:11
thechrisIt looks like some always blocks were converted to synchronous blocks, but the blocking assignments were left in place.03:11
wolfspraulthere can be no doubt in my mind that this has been a very strong open sourcing back then, that cannot be retracted03:11
wolfspraulwpwrak: you can also email them if you like, there's no magic about that... :-)03:12
wolfspraulprobably email Lattice legal right away, I think they are most likely to respond03:12
wpwrakwolfspraul: well, you want to know the history before approaching them. so better if someone who's more familiar with that does that than someone like me, who knows very little about that. just creates confusion.03:15
wolfspraulI will not email them, the situation is clear imo.03:17
kristianpaulthechris: sorry i cant comment on this bug too much, due GMT lekernel (Sebastien) may be sleep by now, but you can hang on some hours here and wait for a reply...03:18
kristianpaulthechris: i think you should write to the mail list, about your concern, it also will open the dicussion and will make more clear the posibble issue you point for all of us :-)~03:19
wpwrakwolfspraul: it would be nice to get permission to remove the inconsistent comments. or at least some soothing words from lattice legal. other people will find this and dislike it.03:20
wolfspraulkristianpaul: still there?05:38
wolfspraulour doubtful friend emailed Lattice legal, which is great05:38
wolfspraulyou pointed him to section 11, which in his super high blood pressure he didn't really think through fully :-)05:38
wolfspraulsection 11 is for 3rd party open source codes Lattice included with their open source codes, as specified in 11.b and 11.c05:39
wolfspraulwhy do people start to read a license at section 11 ?05:39
wolfspraulsection 1, 2, 3, and so on applies to the Lattice source files imho05:39
wolfspraulanyway, it's great that he emailed lattice semi, even if he wrote them nonsense. let's see whether he gets a response and whether he then shares the response with us.05:40
wolfspraulhe may pull a "I got a response and it's bad but I won't tell you" on us, which I would fully dismiss.05:40
wolfspraul:-)05:41
wolfspraullicense fun05:41
wolfspraulif only companies would pick established licenses rather than writing their own...05:41
awxiangfu, the new booted show up patch from 2011-05-09 is blue background. right?06:24
wpwrakwolfspraul: the streets would be full of starving lawyers ...06:32
wpwrakwolfspraul: how will we find out if that pem got a result ?06:33
wolfspraullet's just wait what he says next06:53
wolfspraulwhat he wrote to lattice legal is nonsense of course06:53
wpwrakwolfspraul: if there a means to order comments by date ? all i get is that tree view, which makes it almost impossible to find new comments06:54
wpwrakwolfspraul: but there are files claiming they're confidential and proprietary, contradicting what's stated elsewhere ?06:54
wolfspraulwell06:56
wolfspraulfirst of all that guy just must have serious blood pressure problems or something06:56
wolfspraulhe is jumping between his arguments so fast that it doesn't make much sense to discuss with him06:57
wpwrakwell, that whole comments section is full of aggression06:57
wolfspraulthe header file says that you have to have a license from Lattice06:57
wolfspraulthat's the style nowadays06:57
wolfspraulthe aggression. I've seen worse.06:58
wpwraknaw ... look at hackaday. completely different response06:58
wolfspraulcomments sections are totally loosing their value. depressing to see what kinds of people have time for comments nowadays...06:58
wpwrak(for ubb-vga)06:58
wolfspraulso about those files06:58
wolfspraulit says you have to have a license06:58
wolfsprauland we do, like anybody who will download the files from lattice06:58
wolfspraulwho do you think wrote the text in LICENSE.LATTICE? :-)06:59
wpwrakoh, so anyone who copies them from us doens't have a license ?06:59
wolfsprauljust read LICENSE.LATTICE06:59
wolfspraulit's all their06:59
wolfspraulthere06:59
wolfspraulredistribution, source, binary, etc.06:59
wolfsprauland don't start at section 11, start at section 106:59
wolfspraul:-)06:59
wolfspraulhmm07:01
wolfspraulI just read it and that's not the right one :-)07:01
wolfspraulok, Appendix C07:03
wolfspraulthere should be a fine for not picking established licenses...07:05
wpwrakappendix C says "he Software subject to this Open Source License Agreement is the output files generated by the Provider's LatticeMico32 System."07:06
wpwraksections 1 through 11 say that you can use their stuff indefinitely (unless you fail to comply with the license), but they don't seem to give you a right to redistribute07:07
wolfspraulyes correct, I was wrong too07:07
wolfspraulAppendix C is the open source part07:07
wolfspraulI guess we need to go throguh the process how the files are downloaded from lattice, and how you eventually come up with those ca. 20 source .v files07:08
wolfspraulour short tempered license friend has emailed lattice legal, which is always good07:09
wolfspraulshould we go back into this as well now, or just wait for him first?07:09
wpwraki don't quite understand appendix C ... what is "the Provider's LatticeMico32 System" exactly ? according to the wording, it's something that generates files, similar to bison generating C source for the parser07:10
wolfspraulwe would need to understand where the .v files come from07:11
wolfspraulwhat makes them covered by the open-source appendix c07:11
wpwrak(ask or wait) dunno. do you think his questions cover what you would ask ?07:11
wpwrakdoes lekernel have any contact with lattice legal or someone in lattice who could connect them ?07:11
wolfspraulhe asks in a strange way, but it doesn't matter, if he gets any response on the subject, it will be helpful07:14
wolfspraul(and if he shares that response with us)07:14
wolfspraulI don't know whether lekernel had direct lattice contact.07:15
wpwrakyou may want to contact that pem privately to make sure he keeps you in the loop07:15
wpwrakseems to be difficult to track things on slashdot. besides, he may not care to update an old and stale thread07:16
wolfspraulaha, in CHANGELOG kernel gives his source as mico32_72_linux.tar07:18
wolfspraullet's google for that...07:18
wolfspraulok the same stuff is here for example https://svn.reflextor.com/tmto-svn/fpga/main/cores/lm32/07:19
wolfspraulthat doesn't proove anything of course07:19
wpwrak(communication with lattice) if lekernel doesn't have a channel, you may want to introduce yourself to lic_admn@latticesemi.com, so that they know what you're doing and that they keep you in the loop as well (with a copy to pem, if he lets you have his e-mail address))07:22
wolfspraulhonestly I see no need for that right now. let's wait for Sebastien first, maybe he can tell us more about mico32_72_linux.tar07:24
wpwraksure07:24
wolfspraulif those files are in fact not open source, then they need to be replaced. but that would not be in sync with what I've heard from many people, regarding the open source nature of this core and the core source files.07:24
wolfspraulalso, small detail, it's not what lattice themselves are saying right on the open source homepage :-)07:25
wolfspraulhttp://www.latticesemi.com/products/intellectualproperty/ipcores/mico32/mico32opensourcelicensing.cfm07:25
wpwrakagain, there's that "The generated LatticeMico32 processor". what is it generated from ?07:27
wpwrakalso, you can read this as  "The generated (LatticeMico32 processor and selected peripheral component) HDL codes are available"07:28
wpwrakor as  "The ((generated LatticeMico32 processor) and (selected peripheral component)) HDL codes are available"07:28
wpwrakor even  "The (generated LatticeMico32 processor) and (selected peripheral component HDL codes) are available"07:29
wpwrakthe use of words like "and" and "or" in legal texts should be forbidden :)07:29
wolfspraulit may come from the Mico System Builder (MSB) http://www.latticesemi.com/products/designsoftware/micodevelopmenttools/index.cfm07:29
wolfspraulwhich would also be the path to put the generated source files under Appendix C07:30
wolfspraulkeep in mind that Lattice wants to push their proprietary peripherals, not the open core07:30
wolfspraulthe open core is open, and Appendix C is quite clear about that. but that's not the center of what they offer for download, which makes the genesis of those open source files a bit hard to follow, I guess.07:30
wpwrak(mico builder) okay, that clarifies things a bit07:31
wolfspraulopen core, closed peripherals07:31
wolfspraulthat was the idea I think07:31
wolfspraulthat's why Sebastien doesn't use any of their peripherals, not even the SDRAM controller07:32
wolfspraulthis seems to be the root homepage of all homepages... http://www.latticesemi.com/products/intellectualproperty/ipcores/mico32/index.cfm07:34
wpwrakthe license doesn't allow the recipient of the sources/derivative work to redistribute. i.e., the recipient doesn't automatically become a licensee07:35
wpwrak(closed peripheraps) i see07:35
wolfspraulyes but you are quoting from the closed part, or from Appendix C?07:37
wpwrakappendix C07:37
wpwraki don't see it anywhere say that the recipient of your source also becomes a licensee07:37
wpwrakinstead, appendix C says "The Provider grants to You a personal, non-exclusive right [...]"07:38
wolfspraulI think that's true, that would not go down well with the FSF/GPL philosophy :-)07:38
wpwrakyeah07:39
wolfspraulbut under 2. you read about right to modify and distribute derivative work07:39
wolfspraulyou are saying that right stops at the first recipient?07:39
wpwrakit's implicit. by default, you have no rights07:40
wpwrakthat's also what tripped the violators in a few gpl-violations cases07:41
wolfspraulyes and no. anybody can download the same sources from lattice and get the same rights.07:41
wpwrakthey boldly claimed that the gpl was invalid and that they were therefore not bound by its terms. the judge simply pointed out that, if the license was indeed invalid, they had no license at all. they left, tail between their legs :)07:42
wpwrakyes, you can do that07:42
wolfsprauland why would lattice give me redistribution rights? which rights am I passing on to my recipients? why do they want me to keep the original copyright notices intact then?07:42
wpwrakwhich means there's a bit of a time bomb. if lattice decide some day to stop this (or they fold, get bought, etc.), then no new licensee can be created07:43
wolfspraulI understand this problem and it's another problem with the whole open source mico32 license, agreed.07:43
wpwrakthe redistribution could be to allow your customers to just read the code07:44
wolfspraulsure07:44
wolfspraulthis part is a known limitation/weakness of the openess of mico3207:45
wpwrakso it seems07:45
wolfspraulI think it has very little practical impact though.07:45
wolfspraulthe files have been available for anybody to download for 5 years now.07:45
wolfspraulhow could anybody not claim to have them downloaded in 2008, even if lattice stopped the downloads in 2014...07:46
wolfspraulbut maybe now that we look at all this closer, you understand why I have little hope that quickly contacting lattice legal will improve much07:47
wolfspraulit's a mess!07:47
wpwrakdo you need some registration for download ? or do you just grab the files ?07:47
wolfspraulnever ever will they clean up all this entangled legal mess simply because some open source project feels uneasy about something07:47
wpwrak(mess) yeah, and often enough, nobody dares to make a change, even if everybody agrees that there's something wrong07:47
wolfspraulI think you need a registration.07:47
wolfspraulit's too intertwined, this will not be cleaned up further07:48
wpwrakso they know who their licensees are07:48
wolfsprauland from a practical standpoint, mico32 is open07:48
wolfspraulthey probably have a database, well they shoudl have one :-)07:48
wolfspraulmaybe I should download a few copies as sharism, qi, wolfgang, etc. just in case.07:48
wolfspraulhmm, the download just started without any registration07:51
wpwraknice :)07:52
wolfspraulmaybe that comes as part of the installer... the webpage says "license agreement approval required"07:52
wolfsprauland also "account sign-in required", but the download is instant07:52
wolfspraulmaybe legal should also talk to the server admins once in a while...07:52
wolfspraulif you wanted to make this all super legal safe, you would go to a notary public, and walk through the entire download process. record it all on video.07:53
wpwrakmaybe it's just a program that shows a form and then downloads the real stuff :)07:53
wolfspraullet the notary public sign that everything happened exactly as shown on the video, seal the whole thing, and put the sealed thing to a court as a preemptive protection step07:54
wolfspraulseriously, I've seen this kind of thing happening07:54
wolfspraulonce you fight between tough lawyers, all these things will be done07:54
lekerneloh, the usual "closed fpga" troll07:54
lekernelpeople never learn07:54
wpwrakwell, you could ping them, see if they're willing to hear what ails you07:54
wolfspraullekernel: no there is someone who saw the 'proprietary & confidential' comment in the mico32 rtl .v files07:55
lekernelyes, that too07:55
wolfspraulhe probably did a 'grep -ir confidential *' over the source tree07:55
wpwraksometimes, tehre are actually good and friendly lawyers07:55
wolfsprauloh sure, absolutely.07:55
lekerneltbh I'm not worried about LM32. rewriting that would take what? 1 month? maybe 2?07:56
wpwrakthe prop & conf bit is ugly. that really ought to go07:56
wpwraklekernel: i know you'd say that ;-))07:56
wpwraks/know/knew/07:56
wolfspraulhow did you get to those rtl .v files, where did mico32_72_linux.tar come from?07:56
wolfspraulI guess it's from the Mico System Builder07:57
lekernelit's not going to be worth my time as long as it doesn't go any further than a little troll from time to time07:57
lekernelyes07:57
wolfspraulso those files are covered under Appendix C of LICENSE.LATTICE? (cough, if you remember Appendix C :-))07:57
wolfspraulyou must remember Appendix C, you think about every paragraph of that file every day, I'm sure.07:57
wolfspraulI am downloading Diamond 1.2 / Lattice Mico System right now, then I see what happens and how i get to that mico32_72_linux.tar07:58
wolfspraulso far no registration, no nothing. it's downloading (300mb)07:59
wolfspraullekernel: btw, congratulations that they took your slashdot story!07:59
wolfsprauleven though I thought the headline was weak :-)07:59
wolfspraulI'm telling you there are dozens of good stories inside Milkymist, we just need to get them out... This is a great start.08:00
wolfspraullekernel: did you sign a license agreement with Lattice?08:01
lekernelno08:01
wolfspraulok, to not waste more of your time, let me walk through this download myself first...08:01
wolfspraulwpwrak: also keep in mind what I said earlier - Lattice went through _A LOT_ of strategic changes in the last 5 years08:01
wolfspraulit sounds like Om from the distance...08:02
wolfspraulthat may explain the sometimes contradictory statements and snippets here and there08:02
wolfsprauland the various managers that were behind this or that initiative have all long since been shuffled around, or left, or changed their minds, or whatever08:02
wpwrakwolfspraul: yeah. i've seen funny cases of dead-ended licenses. e.g., once i got information about some ATM board under a "gentleman's agreement" that would let me write a linux driver but i couldn't redistribute the document. fair enough. almost at the same time, another group got the same document under NDA. they also wrote a driver, but cuoldn't distribute their source.08:05
wolfspraulI think mico32 is a safe and good choice as an open core for Milkymist.08:05
wolfspraulthose that disagree can do something else, I don't care08:05
wolfspraulwhen the time comes that the project has gained enough critical mass to support all the various things we are really after, that small core is the least thing anybody would be worried in replacing with a 100% gpl core anyway.08:06
wolfspraulso imho, our priorities and focus are perfectly correct08:06
wpwrakwolfspraul: meanwhile, my stiff went into mainline and is there till the present day, with detailed comments on all the registers and stuff. at the company that made the board, also managers changed. that other group never managed to get out of the NDA, even though it protected no information what wouldn't have been there for everyone to grab, and it greatly diminished the value of that group's work08:07
wpwrakhow old is the lm32 core ?08:07
wpwraki mean the architecture, etc.08:07
wolfspraul5 years08:08
wolfspraulhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mico3208:08
wpwrakhmm. a patent risk for a good while then08:09
wolfspraul:-)08:09
wpwrakthose prop & conf files, are they generated ? or do they come via a different path ?08:09
wolfspraulI think they are from mico32_72_linux.tar, which I think is a result of the mico system builder08:10
wolfsprauland I'm downloading "diamond 1.2" right now, 300 mb, let's see whether that's in there...08:10
wolfspraulI would think that software lets me select peripherals, and then I click 'generate output' or so. we see.08:11
wpwrakthe non-propagation of the license may not be such a big deal, but the prop & conf headers probably are. probably not with lattice but certainly with the community. that's kinda like trying to import a product that has "RoHS" and "99% LEAD" printed right next to each other.08:13
wolfspraulI don't think that will change.08:16
wolfspraulI don't think we should edit that header, we should leave it exactly as-is.08:16
wolfspraulif anything we can add a line pointing to the LICENSE file.08:16
wolfspraulor to another file that explains the entire genesis of those source files, and which license applies where08:17
wolfspraulI highly doubt Lattice legal will start any sort of cleanup, but if I'm wrong, even better.08:17
wpwrakdo you think there's a risk in asking ?08:19
wolfspraulabsolutely not, so it's great that pem did08:19
wolfspraulasking is always good08:19
wpwrakgood :)08:19
wpwrakbest case outcome would be that they clean it up08:19
wolfspraulI've had cases where the asking backfired, for example Ingenic noticed that they made a mistake (!) in putting the pms on their ftp server.08:20
wolfspraulbut let's say that kind of thing can only happen with really stupid companies08:20
wpwrakstill an okay outcome would be if they assure you that this is covered by appendix c despite the threatening language08:20
wolfspraulof course08:20
wpwrakneutral would be no change to the status quo08:20
wolfspraulthat's what I expect. some legalese that basically says nothing, or things we all immediately agree with.08:23
wolfspraulbut... the good thing about our energetic friend is that he worded it like an attack.08:23
wolfspraulsometimes legal has to act if they are notified of some bad thing happening. if they don't, that can later be used against them.08:23
wpwrak(attack) i guess that's all he knows ;-)08:24
wpwrak(moving legal) yes, harder to just sit it out :)08:24
wolfsprauloh they need to be careful to not fall into some trap08:24
wolfspraullet's see what happens08:25
wolfspraulah, I give up. the rpm I can download is for i386, I don't have one easily.08:37
wpwrakno compatibility libs ?08:38
wolfspraulI don't want to go through a virtual machine and all now only to find out the obvious in the end.08:38
wpwrak;-)08:38
wolfspraulthis core and its implementation are open source, Appendig C. done.08:39
wolfspraul:-)08:39
wolfspraulAppendix C08:39
kristianpaulwolfspraul: (license) i see, lets whait a then :-)10:49
wolfspraulsomeone replied to my post with MOD PARENT UP10:51
wolfsprauldoes that mean they think I wasn't nice? don't understand what this means :-)10:51
wolfspraula bit hard to calmly discuss with someone like this guy pem who is jumping to conclusions, jumping from argument to another, reading selectively, etc.10:52
kristianpaulAPPENDIX C, yeah10:54
wolfspraulyou can see his thought process there10:56
wolfspraul"you said..."10:56
wolfspraul"how can you say ... and then ..."10:56
wolfspraulall in his fantasy world, speaking to himself10:56
wolfspraulkristianpaul: what does MOD PARENT UP mean?10:58
kristianpaulah, LatticeMico_System_License_Agreement.txt11:03
kristianpaulat least is on the top of my micosystem dir..11:04
kristianpauloh dear.. too much i need work11:05
kristianpaulread you later11:05
--- Thu May 12 201100:00

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.9.2 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!