Isn't it great that you are against a solution that would put a dent in sales of your overpriced rip off 700€ hardware? Gotta love the impartiality here...
The exception could be allowed now and then removed later once the supposed new solutions are done and working. ________________________________ From: Øyvind Harboe <oyvind.har...@zylin.com> To: Zach Welch <z...@superlucidity.net> Cc: openocd-development@lists.berlios.de Sent: Tuesday, 23 June, 2009 22:52:53 Subject: Re: [Openocd-development] License On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 11:41 PM, Zach Welch<z...@superlucidity.net> wrote: > On Tue, 2009-06-23 at 23:37 +0200, Øyvind Harboe wrote: >> > You will need to get confirmation from other contributors, as I think >> > the actual revision might be far lower than anyone realizes presently. >> >> I started my contributions at svn 214 (or earlier, not easy to see >> from a cursory look at the logs). > > Just so we are clear (in this thread), are you for or against adding an > exception to the GPL? Against currently. The current technical problems are just a tiny bump in the road compared to the >2000 revisions we have in SVN. We need a robust license(GPL is that) and we need to make sure that all the things we want open stay open. Who's to say what the effects of an exception would be? Where would it start? Where would it stop? There are LOTS of closed source hardware debuggers out the(good ones, we use them every day). The whole point of OpenOCD is that it is ... open. -- 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
_______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
