Problem with STM32 HAL license

[Gedare Bloom]

On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 11:02 AM Joel Sherrill <joel at rtems.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 11:57 AM Gedare Bloom <gedare at rtems.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 10:38 AM Karel Gardas <karel at functional.vision> wrote:
>> >
>> > On 6/13/22 18:27, Joel Sherrill wrote:
>> > > This impacts other imports from STM so I am curious what Karel,
>> > > Sebastian, and Andrei are seeing for the license in the code they are
>> > > importing and what they plan to do.
>> >
>> > So far on H7, the HAL used is older code base which is clearly BSD-3
>> > license:
>> >
>> > https://git.rtems.org/rtems/tree/bsps/arm/stm32h7/hal/stm32h7xx_hal.c#n22
>> >
>> > however to support new boards or peripherals I've imported few files
>> > which use the same unclear license message. I've clarified it in any
>> > imported file like:
>> >
>> > https://git.rtems.org/rtems/tree/bsps/arm/stm32h7/boards/stm/stm32h757i-eval/system_stm32h7xx.c#n35
>> >
>> > the problem is obviously scalability of this solution and future merges.
>> > You can do that one one/two board files, but probably not on whole HAL
>> > with ~100 files.
>> > I also remember that Sebastian recommended to completely replace this
>> > license note with the specified license (to which note points). But I've
>> > not done that due to reluctancy of touching STM license notes here and
>> > hence came with committer clarification message below every such note.
>> >
>>
>> My preference here would be to use injection of the committer comment,
>> along with the addition of the SPDX tag at the top line. You should be
>> able to automate this injection even for 100+ files, as long as they
>> are using the same license. Keeping these changes together at the top
>> of the file should also help handle merge problems if updates are
>> pulled later.
>
>
> What do you mean "injection of the committer comment"? Do you mean
> Karel's example? Or just something in the git commit?
>
Karel's example. Something to show the due diligence that was done.

> If we can name this for SPDX, that would be great. Ideally all files have
> an SPDX annotation and that points to a unique master copy of the license
> at the top of the RTEMS source tree.
>
If it doesn't match an SPDX tag, I think that is a problem for us to accept.

> I've suggested an "origin" file before where details like Karel captured
> can be placed once in a directory.
>
That's ok, but harder to maintain.

> --joel
>>
>>
>> > Hence I asked Duc on discord to ask here for advice. BTW, new HAL for H7
>> > will be probably in the same situation like Duc seing with current F4.
>> >
>> > https://github.com/STMicroelectronics/STM32CubeH7/blob/master/Drivers/STM32H7xx_HAL_Driver/Src/stm32h7xx_hal.c
>> >
>> >
>> > So we definitely need to find a solution to this issue.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Karel
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > devel mailing list
>> > devel at rtems.org
>> > http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel