kicad-developers team mailing list archive
Mailing list archive
Re: RFC: Moving footprint wizards to github
The libraries are licensed under CC-BY-SA 4.0
Is this the proper license for footprint wizards as they are code / scripts
and not just "data"?
Also, some of the existing scripts contain license information which
indicate various forms of licensing (MIT / GPL2+ )
Intuitively I think that this is effectively KiCad "source" and should be
licensed under the same arrangement. Here's a clipping from one of the
> # This program source code file is part of KiCad, a free EDA CAD
> # Copyright (C) 2012-2014 KiCad Developers, see change_log.txt for
> # This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
> # modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License
> # as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2
> # of the License, or (at your option) any later version.
> # This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
> # but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
> # MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
> # GNU General Public License for more details.
> # You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
> # along with this program; if not, you may find one here:
> # http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.html
> # or you may search the http://www.gnu.org website for the version 2
> # or you may write to the Free Software Foundation, Inc.,
> # 51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110-1301, USA
I am looking to as a matter of priority set up a LICENSE file and a CLA for
the repo, so looking for input here...
On Sat, Dec 15, 2018 at 12:43 PM Oliver Walters <
> The footprint wizards are currently mixed in with the source and could be
> better served if they are community contributed in an easier fashion.
> A while ago I made a repo for this purpose -
> Are there any objections to looking into moving the python script files to
> this repo? They would need to be pulled in at build time. But it would
> allow better community contribution and continuing improvements.
> At a minimum, the scripts do not conform to the current KLC requirements.