On Fri, Oct 09, 2009 at 11:57:51AM +0200, Øyvind Harboe wrote: > On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 11:20 AM, Daniel Morris <[email protected]> > wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 09, 2009 at 07:49:51AM +0200, Øyvind Harboe wrote: > >> How can I find out if Freescale has signed a copyright assignment > >> for their RedBoot changes? > >> > >> http://www.freescale.com/webapp/sps/site/prod_summary.jsp?code=IMX35PDK > >> > >> > >> Ask Freescale? > >> > >> "We have a policy of respecting all open source licenses." > >> > >> That is a great start and good to hear, but it doesn't answer my > >> question... > > > > And do you think attempts at public ridicule or embarrassment will? > > No. > > And if anyone at Freescale is listening in on this, then please > accept my apologies. > > My major worry is that GPL code has crept into their RedBoot > changes. As it seems pretty clear that they have not made a generic > eCos HAL, but rather customized RedBoot to load Linux on their > hardware, then presumably, Freescale wouldn't have to worry about > the eCos code becoming GPL.
Well, depending if they've started from 2.0 onwards, then they can of course combine GPL code - subject to the whole then inheriting the full GPL terms/obligations. I have to qualify that statement as it is surprising the number of times that code turns out to have come from pre-2.0 which was not "full GPL" compatible (and had onerous assignment terms to a previous copyright holder). Of course versioning/release numbering touches a whole other can of worms! A case in point, a conversation whilst exhibiting at ESC Boston two weeks ago, which started "But I thought eCos was dead". Now there were very important reasons why the move from 2->3 was such a long time coming and took such unrelenting persuasion to bring about the sourcebase changes, but I think that as a whole community we need to be aware of how eCos is perceived by those who could use it and may be overlooking it. I've long been an advocate of moving to a fixed-timescale (minor) version numbering scheme. I read an interview with Greg Kroah-Hartman on LWN a while ago where he made some pretty compelling arguments showing how the major Linux distributions had benefited by moving to time-based cycles from feature-based freezes, where it encouraged timely contribution. Even on a more focused single-product, such as VirtualBox, I find it reassuring to look back at the minor version history and see them clocking along every couple of months. I expect those in the know may continue to prefer to work directly with a development repository or certified base, and may even consider an eCos "tag, tar & compress" minor release bump each Spring & Autumn as a distraction. However, showing the lights are on to the as-yet uninitiated is an important part of continuing to build upon eCos' growth. Daniel %<---------------------------------------------------------------------- Daniel Morris - Sales & Marketing Director eCosCentric - The eCos and RedBoot experts Tel: +44 1223 245 571 - [email protected] DDI: +44 1269 591 171 - [email protected] -- Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss
