Dear List, 1) I wont support any action against someone who distributes OpenOCD binaries linked against FTD2XX as long as there's no viable alternative. When I wrote the OpenOCD the liberties of potential users were paramount, and this hasn't changed. There is no viable alternative to FTD2XX on Windows, and from what I've read this is going to get worse with Vista and Windows 7.
Could actually be funny to watch a GPL case where the original copyright holder states that he sees no problem in linking his GPL licensed code with a proprietary library that is clearly no derivative work of his code... that doesn't even sound too unreasonable... even the GPL FAQ says that linking proprietary libraries "may" impose legal issues (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#FSWithNFLibs) 2) The OpenOCD project itself released binaries linked against FTD2XX on its Berlios page, for example openocd-cygwin-ftd2xx-20060213.tar.gz. I don't think it's totally unreasonable to extrapolate some right of distributing OpenOCD+FTD2XX based on this... 3) I would be willing to add a license exception that allows linking with the FTD2XX library and I invite other major contributors to do the same. The result may not be a OpenOCD rev. 2000+ that's accompanied with this exception, but I suppose we might find some revision where we can formally grant our users a right they have been executing for almost four years. Regards, Dominic
_______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
