[ECOS] ecos license question.

Fabrice Gautier Fabrice_Gautier@sdesigns.com
Thu Jan 16 05:33:00 GMT 2003


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jonathan Larmour [mailto:jifl@eCosCentric.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2003 6:20 AM
> To: jake smith
> Cc: ecos-discuss@sources.redhat.com
> Subject: Re: [ECOS] ecos license question.
> 
> 
> jake smith wrote:
> > We are developing a commercial product using eCos (x86
> > platform). We have made the following changes to the
> > eCos .
> > 1. We have Modified eCos serial driver for BREAK
> > support. 
> > 2. Added custom keypad driver package to the eCos. No
> > eCos files are modified.  
> >  
> >     Do we need to make our product Open Source ? 
> >
> > We have also used redboot IDE source code in the
> > application software. 
> > 
> >     Do we need to release full or part of the
> > application code ?
> 
> I will assume you are using sources downloaded since May last 
> year. The answer is yes. [...]
> 
> The only code you can keep to yourself are files containing 
> no eCos code in part or full.

Grumf... I'm still doubtfull about this new "GPL but not quite" license. 

Basically the exception says that you can link non-GPL code with eCos code
right.  So basically this is even weaker than LGPL, because
1./ You dont have to enable the user to relink you code with newer version
of eCos (by providing the object files)
2./ You can modify the behaviour of existing eCos code by adding hooks in
eCos code and calling your own proprietary functions with those hooks.

MPL seems to be the license i know that ressemble the most this eCos
license. I still dont get understand why this is called "GPL with exception"
when the exception destroy most of the spirit of GPL...

What would be the difference if eCos was released under MPL ?

Thanks

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



More information about the Ecos-discuss mailing list