Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [evb] 45873: - Add new unified VGA/VBE miniport driver. Based on NT4 DDK Cirrus Miniport Driver Sample with my modifications (marked with // eVb) to change Cirrus parts to VGA parts if needed. Also add VBE suppor which is not in Cirru
Does the EULA allow you to redistribute sample code without stipulations? I seem to recall certain versions of the DDK requiring that derivative works be used only with a Windows OS. Can you please send me a copy of the EULA for the DDK?
Thanks Steven
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 12:22 PM, evb@svn.reactos.org wrote:
Author: evb Date: Fri Mar 5 18:22:18 2010 New Revision: 45873
URL: http://svn.reactos.org/svn/reactos?rev=45873&view=rev Log:
- Add new unified VGA/VBE miniport driver. Based on NT4 DDK Cirrus Miniport Driver Sample with my modifications (marked with // eVb) to change Cirrus parts to VGA parts if needed. Also add VBE suppor which is not in Cirrus driver, but exists in Windows VGA miniport.
Stipulation only exist in newer DDK, that why old sample used.
Also, storage drivers in ReactOS are NT4 (atapi) DDK sample too, so why raising issue now?
[eVb]
Does the EULA allow you to redistribute sample code without stipulations? I seem to recall certain versions of the DDK requiring that derivative works be used only with a Windows OS. Can you please send me a copy of the EULA for the DDK?
Thanks Steven
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 12:22 PM, evb@svn.reactos.org wrote:
Author: evb Date: Fri Mar 5 18:22:18 2010 New Revision: 45873
URL: http://svn.reactos.org/svn/reactos?rev=45873&view=rev Log:
- Add new unified VGA/VBE miniport driver. Based on NT4 DDK Cirrus Miniport Driver Sample with my modifications (marked with // eVb) to change Cirrus parts to VGA parts if needed. Also add VBE suppor which is not in Cirrus driver, but exists in Windows VGA miniport.
-- Steven Edwards
"There is one thing stronger than all the armies in the world, and that is an idea whose time has come." - Victor Hugo
Ros-dev mailing list Ros-dev@reactos.org http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 12:35 PM, Ros Arm ros.arm@reactos.org wrote:
Stipulation only exist in newer DDK, that why old sample used.
Also, storage drivers in ReactOS are NT4 (atapi) DDK sample too, so why raising issue now?
I've not looked closely at the storage drivers. If the EULA for the NT4 DDK allows it, then I don't care. Thank you Microsoft.
Yes, I researched this issue when adding them, and yes - thank you, Microsoft.
All work of ros.arm is also based exclusively on NT4 DDK (actually, they don't ship so many video stuff in newer DDKs at all).
WBR, Aleksey Bragin.
On Mar 5, 2010, at 8:40 PM, Steven Edwards wrote:
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 12:35 PM, Ros Arm ros.arm@reactos.org wrote:
Stipulation only exist in newer DDK, that why old sample used.
Also, storage drivers in ReactOS are NT4 (atapi) DDK sample too, so why raising issue now?
I've not looked closely at the storage drivers. If the EULA for the NT4 DDK allows it, then I don't care. Thank you Microsoft.
-- Steven Edwards
"There is one thing stronger than all the armies in the world, and that is an idea whose time has come." - Victor Hugo
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 2:01 PM, Aleksey Bragin aleksey@reactos.org wrote:
Yes, I researched this issue when adding them, and yes - thank you, Microsoft.
All work of ros.arm is also based exclusively on NT4 DDK (actually, they don't ship so many video stuff in newer DDKs at all).
OK cool, that's good enough for me. I would just hate to see some day down the road some company that wants to sell ReactOS products and services become liable to Microsoft. Thanks for keeping an eye out on this.
As Steven is our IP guy, is it not worth him going over the EULA too?
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 7:42 PM, Steven Edwards winehacker@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 2:01 PM, Aleksey Bragin aleksey@reactos.org wrote:
Yes, I researched this issue when adding them, and yes - thank you, Microsoft.
All work of ros.arm is also based exclusively on NT4 DDK (actually, they don't ship so many video stuff in newer DDKs at all).
OK cool, that's good enough for me. I would just hate to see some day down the road some company that wants to sell ReactOS products and services become liable to Microsoft. Thanks for keeping an eye out on this.
-- Steven Edwards
"There is one thing stronger than all the armies in the world, and that is an idea whose time has come." - Victor Hugo
Ros-dev mailing list Ros-dev@reactos.org http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 2:56 PM, Ged Murphy gedmurphy@gmail.com wrote:
As Steven is our IP guy, is it not worth him going over the EULA too?
Remember IANAL, just trying to help watch out for the project. I would still like to look over it if its handy though but I recall the nt4 ddk was pretty liberal. The project policy has been a little inconsistent regarding using Microsoft code before, and I was pretty conservative on it but as long as the licensing is clear, we should not fear it from a copyright point of view. I mean hell, they've been submitting patches for Linux for Virtual Machine stuff. We've got more to fear from patents anyway.
I will be very glad if he does! Another confirmation is never excessive. Or maybe finding some problem which is hidden.
On Mar 5, 2010, at 10:56 PM, Ged Murphy wrote:
As Steven is our IP guy, is it not worth him going over the EULA too?
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 7:42 PM, Steven Edwards winehacker@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 2:01 PM, Aleksey Bragin aleksey@reactos.org wrote:
Yes, I researched this issue when adding them, and yes - thank you, Microsoft.
All work of ros.arm is also based exclusively on NT4 DDK
(actually, they
don't ship so many video stuff in newer DDKs at all).
OK cool, that's good enough for me. I would just hate to see some day down the road some company that wants to sell ReactOS products and services become liable to Microsoft. Thanks for keeping an eye out on this.
-
Aleksey Bragin -
Ged Murphy -
Ros Arm -
Steven Edwards