-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 172
Add License annotation to external functions #4513
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Add License annotation to external functions #4513
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
75f68ed
to
9c05651
Compare
25ae486
to
60bb551
Compare
60bb551
to
9b173ad
Compare
9b173ad
to
bc31e7f
Compare
Make license texts explicit.
bc31e7f
to
44ec97a
Compare
WalkthroughThis update adds explicit license annotations to all external C function declarations across multiple Modelica packages. The modifications introduce Changes
Suggested labels
Poem
📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: CodeRabbit UI 📒 Files selected for processing (10)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (2)
🔇 Additional comments (40)
🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
This PR comes along with #4411 (after merging Mo-2900) and makes the license texts of the external functions/objects explicit such that FMU exporting tools no longer need to distribute all files of
modelica:/Modelica/Resources/Licenses/
along with the FMU, but only the actually used license texts.Edit: Dependency on lapack (and the corresponding license texts) still is an exception since it is not seen as MSL dependency, but as tool requirement (see #2849).
Edit 2: Needs to be coordinated with #4240 and #4496.
Summary by CodeRabbit