If we don't constantly show that some work has been done by open-source some people will tend to think it was done for free, no effort and they start to demand more results with less funds in shorter time. This is why we should tell to develop open-source instead buy expensive closed solutions-per-problem because investing in open-source in fact can bring better results with smaller cost... Creating open-source is not free and it is time consuming. Some people does not understand this fact.
If some laboratory or company use closed source solutions but for some reason they want use open-source they cannot at the same time block support for open-source, or they should consequently purchase _everything_ commercial and closed source and even don't touch the open-source to see how bad things will get with their work and funding :-) Closed source applications are also full of bugs and limited functionalities. There is nothing good with that except you get working solution instantly... but you cannot change or develop it anyway. If anyone wants to use additional channels of FTDI I would recommend creating that support in open-source rather than mix open-source with proprietary stuff. The same with transfer efficiency and everything else. People start to integrate open-source in their commercial products with nothing in return. This is not fair and we should not support such actions. This is why I fully support decision to give preference for open-source libftdi rather than libftd2xx (please not that there is no libftd2xx for my system). Best regards :-) Tomek -- CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
