Read this over at Neowin.net and didn't see it posted anywhere here. It's only from a blog, but could this be a start to getting the dev's the source code they need? or just some bs from a guy's blog?
http://www.neowin.net/news/majority-of-android-oems-lose-linux-distribution-rights
Related
Regarding: [ROM][ICS]ICS Stock v1 by Rushabh25
Yeah, closed down without any further notice from moderator.
Would like to know the exact reason and wich XDA rule number was broken.
Actually he did correct the credits.
But it seems not enough to some/all of the devs of the origin works and the many grudgers. Nowadays you have to beg for permissions to use their work. If you want to do the permissioning correctly, than you have to also go back the long line down to the real originator of the work. And that would be not the devs here on XDA but the little developer at Samsung with his/her teammates. And I highly doubt that anyone up the line has ever done it.
None of you have ever heard of GPL?
Who was complaining about closed source anyway?
Again, if you want to do it correctly than state clearly in your packages under wich license you're releasing your work to the public. Do your homework and sort out which license from whom you're using or violating in the first place before complaining about others.
@mods
Please give at least a hint from which all XDA members also can follow the reason behind the action, if you're going to close this thread like the other previous ones. Btw, if the reason is really copyright infringement of the devs here on this forum, than there should be also several thread closed down, because they clearly altered the Apps (theming) of the original author. I don't even have count the threads with the copied Apps from the official market.
Now than, just imagine how cleaned up XDA would be, if you gonna take the same measurement against every thread, like you have previously done to the just two closed threads.
Have a nice day,
ToS
.
Has you can see i didn't removed the link for the ROM. I just want the op to pm the dev asking for permission (is this to hard to do??)
The point is there must be respect for the developers, because the hardwork for our pleasure is from them.
The credits wheren't given at the begining, and before GPL there is the thanks to people that work for us.
If you want be the responsable for disencourage developers to share their work, then go for it!
Best regards
Just to remind you also the forum rules, that you all read i'm sure:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/announcement.php?a=81
12. Using the work of others.
If you are developing something that is based on the work of another Member, you MUST first seek their permission, and you must give credit to the member whose work you used. If a dispute occurs about who developed / created a piece of work, first try to settle the matter by private message and NOT in open forum. If this fails then you may contact a moderator with clear evidence that the work was created by you.
Convincing evidence will result in copied work being removed. If there is no clear evidence you created the work then in the spirit of sharing all work will remain posted on the forums.
These rules apply to all software posted on XDA unless that software comes with a license that waives these rules.
Quote of 12aon's GPL Thread (sticky in Flyer section)
A little introduction
Recently in several Android fora on XDA-Developers, it has come to the attention of the moderator team that there have been issues regarding developers’ compliance with the GPL. This post aims to clarify the position of XDA on the use of GPL sources, particularly in the development of Android kernels.
Without the GPL, the Android operating system would likely never have come about. Through the work of Linus Torvalds, the Linux kernel was made open source for all to use, share and modify. As Android runs on the Linux kernel, and features numerous modifications to these sources, it would not exist in its present state without the Open Source community.
As a result, it is in the interests of everyone who owns an Android phone, who wishes to see further development on the platform, to ensure that they play their part in upholding both the letter and spirit of the GPL.
The GNU General Public Licence (also known as the GPL) is available to read in full at www.gnu.org
To make it easy for everyone to spot a release that complies with the GPL mark the title of your release thread with [GPL]. If you find a ROM which does not comply with the GPL, or the developer does not issue sources, you can report the post as usual, using the report post button next to the post number. Alternatively you may PM your forum specific moderator.
The Rules as they apply on XDA
As XDA has no legal power to uphold the GPL (and frankly we want to stay as far away from doing so as possible), we can’t force any of our users to abide by the GPL. However it is in XDA’s interests as well as the interests of our developer-base to ensure all GPL-derived materials hosted or linked on XDA comply fully with the GPL.
1.GPL-derived materials that do not come with the complete sources used to compile the GPL components are considered warez, and will be treated as such under forum rule 6 and 9.
2.If you use GPL components, but do not make any modifications to them whatsoever, you should provide a link to the original source of your GPL code. (This excludes ROMs using a stock device kernel)
3.Sources accompanying a release should be complete, and contain all the necessary source code for any modules, scripts or definition files. Complete sources will be defined as those which compile correctly and completely against the platform for which the software is distributed, and which contain any and all modifications made to the released General Public Licenced code. The source code supplied should be the exact version for which the source code is being requested, complete with all modifications.
The Very Quick Summary of General Public License (GPL)
The text of the GPL Licence itself will be used to reach any final conclusion regarding any disputes over GPL Licenced materials. The above is a summary of what XDA expects of members using GPL code, and the complete text can be read at the GNU website.
The GPL states that anyone who modifies GPL licenced code is required to make available the sources used to compile it. This is to further improve and encourage collaborative work, as well as to ensure that the best code possible is produced, and to encourage peer-review of all work. This benefits both developers and end users in numerous ways, including:•Allowing anyone to verify the code they are trusting with their data, and its authenticity
•Encouraging community collaboration to produce faster fixes and updates, and better code
•Helping bring new developments from other devices and fields to your own, letting you benefit from new code that wouldn’t have been available without this sharing.
•The GPL imparts great freedom for GPL end users. It ensures innovation is never stifled and no project is dependent upon any single developer.
It is in everyone’s interest for the GPL to be adhered to, as it gives us all better ROMs, better transparency, and a better atmosphere for developers to work together to make great code.
You are aware that even if you didn't build the binaries yourself, you are required by the GPL to distribute your source code just the same as if you had built them yourself, right?
Or at least extend the same offer that was originally passed to you, on to those, to whom you have distributed the binaries.
So, while you may get on yncconsulting's case about missing some files from his kernel source distribution, by TECHNICALITY, you're kind of required to produce that same source yourself, or at least direct people to where they can get the source...
cfoesch said:
So, while you may get on yncconsulting's case about missing some files from his kernel source distribution, by TECHNICALITY, you're kind of required to produce that same source yourself, or at least direct people to where they can get the source...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i am fully aware of the consequences, and you can read previous release in Acer section on that topic, if you doubt anything.
for the flyer section i linked to Leedroid initially, since that was his release i used.. so yes, i know the ruleset and how to redist. the source including my changes.
keynote, i did NOT link to ync's kernel source, since the link did not work intiially, so i could not write anything but info on the binary release.
Dexter_nlb said:
keynote, i did NOT link to ync's kernel source, since the link did not work intiially, so i could not write anything but info on the binary release.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did you try PMing him about it? When I went looking for the source, and clicked his link and saw it was broken, I PM'ed him, and he said "huh, it must have been deleted while I was cleaning house... oops." and he got it back up the next day...
cfoesch said:
Did you try PMing him about it? When I went looking for the source, and clicked his link and saw it was broken, I PM'ed him, and he said "huh, it must have been deleted while I was cleaning house... oops." and he got it back up the next day...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yes. lets just close that one here. i am in no mood to discuss specific cases.
Guidelines are here to be followed and this post was missing in this section.
I need answers by people who has already ported ubuntu...
did you add the path of your device in /build/main.mk?
It's not needed for Samsung or Asus device but there is no line for HTC.... Because if I add it I got a lot of ***make*** errors.
but if I don't add it I think the build is not full...
any suggest?
utopykzebulon said:
I need answers by people who has already ported ubuntu...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your best chance of getting answers from knowledgeable people is to join the IRC #ubuntu-touch channel. Be patient after asking your question to give someone time to answer. It is not a support phone-line and people are not standing by all the time. Also the core team is mostly in Europe so they may not be around when you pose a question.
Also you can post questions on the Ubuntu-Touch mailing list. Scroll down on this web page to see subscription links under "Building and publishing Touch Preview images" and a link to a porting guide:
https://wiki.edubuntu.org/Touch/Contribute
Very interesting sub-forum for CM13 at ZTE that references the XDA thread, with a link to source code for A2017.
Is this what we've all been waiting for?
ScaryBugThing said:
Very interesting sub-forum for CM13 at ZTE that references the XDA thread, with a link to source code for A2017.
Is this what we've all been waiting for?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
not the be That Guy, but really WHY creating a thread when there is already one?????????
http://forum.xda-developers.com/axon-7/how-to/news-offical-community-builds-z-t3487054
this is why some users get in trouble when trying to Root or Mod. their devices cuz they don't read or look around for things.
P.S. this have nothing to do with me creating that thread few hours ago, my point is search before posting or creating a duplicate thread
"A2017 Source" and "ZTE A2017U Marshmallow Kernel(3.18.x)" are almost the same size (569MB, +- 100KB), so either the A2017 Source is just the kernel of the Chinese model but mis-labeled, or the A2017U Kernel package includes the full source as well. (I'm not a developer, so I'm not sure which is the case)
DrakenFX said:
not the be That Guy, but really WHY creating a thread when there is already one?????????
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was aware of the thread, and no disrespect saying this, but I just didn't think it was a big deal to be honest. I figured the threads would self-regulate - my post was about this instance of "source code" posting which could be confusing if I just add it to a thread talking about the prior misnomer "source code" posting. But if the discussion continues in the other thread, that's fine too.
I know many have forum etiquette pet peeves about not doing multiple threads, but let me respectfully disagree that it's an important issue. In theory, I don't know that having a single thread to discuss multiple discrete instances of ZTE posting "source code" is better than each instance of "source code" posting having its own thread. The former is a nightmare to untangle when you want to determine whether that (not actually helpful) source code posted in August is the referent of a discussion when you're looking for that (hopefully helpful) source code posted in October. Conversely, having multiple threads is a nightmare if you have to do multiple searches. Both have advantages and disadvantages.
That said, sorry - delete this post, do whatever, I just wanted to get the word out.
Sweet! Here's hoping for some development!
Thread closed - someone Ninja'd you HERE!
***Links Removed by Moderator due to violation of Development Section rules***
@System23 Read the stickies before you post.
This post does not qualify for development, as you are simply re-posting others' work.
Read the Forum Rules:
12.1. Give credits where due - Credits and acknowledgements for using and releasing work which is based on someone else's work are an absolute must. Works reported to have no credits will be taken down until proper acknowledgements are added by the member in question;
12.2. Courtesy - While most of the work released on our site falls under the umbrella of open source, that is not the only license model being used by developers on xda-developers. In order to prevent problems, we ask that if you decide to base your work on someone else's that you check the license model being used (as it might not be as permissive as one may think);
12.3. Re-releasing other's works as your own is forbidden. The code that you release into the wild must have something beyond minor aesthetic changes that makes it better than the last.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If in the future you decide to share your own development, you are required to follow the Development Rules sticky as well as the GPL Policy.
This thread has been closed and links removed.