On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 6:30 PM, Freddie Chopin<freddie_cho...@op.pl> wrote: > Should we take silence as an agreement?
No. (Wasn't this summary posted yesterday?) This debate is still alive, give the community time to consider the options and come up with ideas. I haven't followed this debate terribly closely, I'm just waiting for the dust to settle. A few things appear to be clear at this point: - OpenOCD was, is and will remain GPL. Maintainers of OpenOCD will not encourage or facilitate methods to breach or circumvent GPL. - Prior violations are irrelevant and when such violations are discovered, then efforts by maintainers will start to immediatly stop violating GPL. Even if this affects current users and there is no short term solution. - Method of linking is irrelevant according to GPL and more importantly by several of the maintainers/contributors. - There are viable technical alternatives that resolve these issues without violating GPL, but they take work. As always: discussions and patches are greatly appreciated. I don't know the details, but I suspect these issues will be resolved in a month or two from what I skimmed through. (I'm not working on USB stuff so I don't know much about the technical details) -- Øyvind Harboe Embedded software and hardware consulting services http://consulting.zylin.com _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
