From attila.lendvai at gmail.com Sun Feb 11 20:03:57 2007 From: attila.lendvai at gmail.com (Attila Lendvai) Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 21:03:57 +0100 Subject: [snmp1-devel] mib.lisp Message-ID: hi! just wanted to take a look at snmp1 and seems like mib.lisp is not checked in the CVS. another question is about the license: is there a strong confidence behind the license choice or is it just a random pick? GPL renders any code useless in the project i would like to use it in, and i wonder if there's any uncertanity in the choice... thanks for your time, -- - attila "- The truth is that I've been too considerate, and so became unintentionally cruel... - I understand. - No, you don't understand! We don't speak the same language!" (Ingmar Bergman - Smultronst?llet) From simon at limmat.switch.ch Fri Feb 23 21:58:57 2007 From: simon at limmat.switch.ch (Simon Leinen) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 22:58:57 +0100 Subject: [snmp1-devel] mib.lisp In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <17887.25505.126102.942014@limmat.switch.ch> Attila Lendvai writes: > just wanted to take a look at snmp1 and seems like mib.lisp is not > checked in the CVS. Hm, I don't think there should be such a file. There should be a "mib" directory with a few files (defs.lisp, ...) under it. > another question is about the license: is there a strong confidence > behind the license choice or is it just a random pick? GPL renders > any code useless in the project i would like to use it in, and i > wonder if there's any uncertanity in the choice... No, this is a conscious decision. I'm sorry to hear that you cannot use the code under these conditions. With kind regards, -- Simon. From johan at riise-data.no Sat Feb 24 01:00:37 2007 From: johan at riise-data.no (Johan Ur Riise) Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 02:00:37 +0100 Subject: [snmp1-devel] mib.lisp In-Reply-To: <17887.25505.126102.942014@limmat.switch.ch> References: <17887.25505.126102.942014@limmat.switch.ch> Message-ID: <20070224010037.GA3304@riise-data.no> On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 10:58:57PM +0100, Simon Leinen wrote: > Attila Lendvai writes: > > just wanted to take a look at snmp1 and seems like mib.lisp is not > > checked in the CVS. > > Hm, I don't think there should be such a file. There should be a > "mib" directory with a few files (defs.lisp, ...) under it. > > > another question is about the license: is there a strong confidence > > behind the license choice or is it just a random pick? GPL renders > > any code useless in the project i would like to use it in, and i > > wonder if there's any uncertanity in the choice... > > No, this is a conscious decision. I'm sorry to hear that you cannot > use the code under these conditions. > The mib.lisp should be there now. And I have decided to change the license to something more cl-friendly. What do you suggest? Beware that the code is quite immature. I just find a bug in the function that reads the enums from the mibs. -- Hilsen Johan Ur Riise From attila.lendvai at gmail.com Wed Feb 28 13:52:03 2007 From: attila.lendvai at gmail.com (Attila Lendvai) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 14:52:03 +0100 Subject: [snmp1-devel] mib.lisp In-Reply-To: <20070224010037.GA3304@riise-data.no> References: <17887.25505.126102.942014@limmat.switch.ch> <20070224010037.GA3304@riise-data.no> Message-ID: > The mib.lisp should be there now. thanks! > And I have decided to change the license to something more cl-friendly. > What do you suggest? well, our libs (like stefil, computed-class, defclass-star, cl-rdbms) are BSD / public domain. public domain is not accepted in all countries, therefore the dual license, but i'm far from being a license expert. > Beware that the code is quite immature. I just find a bug in the > function that reads the enums from the mibs. (un)fortunately our project seems to be delayed... :| thanks again, -- - attila "- The truth is that I've been too considerate, and so became unintentionally cruel... - I understand. - No, you don't understand! We don't speak the same language!" (Ingmar Bergman - Smultronst?llet)