This is the mail archive of the ecos-discuss@sourceware.org mailing list for the eCos project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Are copyright assignments detrimental to eCos?



Using LGPL does not require you ship your firmware as object files and link later. My understanding of LGPL is that you can ship proprietary core linked with LGPL code, without having to open-source the proprietary code. It is only the modifications of the LGPL code you must publish, which is exactly what we are after.

Jiri.


Alexander Neundorf wrote:


I completely agree with Markus. We are hesitant to contribute our
leon2/3 port and drivers because we do not want to have closed-source
distributions (e.g. eCos Pro) using our code without contributing
back fixes or improvements. The ideal solution would be to license

So GPL or LGPL would be ok for you ?


the eCos code in LGPL. This would allow mixing proprietary applications
with the kernel, while force any improvements or bug fixes to be
published.

Well, and it would enforce that company ship their firmware as object files or relinkable static libraries, so that this together with the LGPL part (eCos then) could be relinked to a working firmware image.
I think that's not a very practical solution.


Alex




-- Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]