[ECOS] Are copyright assignments detrimental to eCos?

Gary Thomas gary@mlbassoc.com
Mon Apr 7 13:28:00 GMT 2008

Jiri Gaisler wrote:
> Alex Schuilenburg wrote:
>> Anyway, nobody is trying to force you to contribute here. I am just 
>> trying to show you some of the benefits contributions can make to your 
>> users, the community as well as yourself. Your changes and 
>> improvements are yours to do with as you see fit, subject to licensing 
>> of course ;-)
> I don't see the benefit to our users if there are two different versions
> of our contribution, one in the anoncvs and one in the Pro. In such
> case, I prefer to have our own fork where we have control over what
> goes into our code modules and where we are able to support it.
> The development model for kernels like RTEMS and linux seems more
> reliable to me. There is only one code base and all testing, validation

At least as far as Linux goes - this is malarkey.  There are more versions
of Linux out there than you could count, mostly for those platforms or
environments where the code either is not acceptable into the public
tree or simply kept back for commercial advantage.  For example, you don't
see the code for the LinkSys routers in the public tree...

> and bug reporting is done on the same set of code. I believe this was also
> the case for eCos as long as Cygnus maintained the code. Going back to
> this model could in fact benefit eCos Pro, since it would create a much
> larger user base for the Pro code, potentially finding more bugs and 
> provide
> more improvements. Just my 2 cents anyhow ...
> Jiri.

Gary Thomas                 |  Consulting for the
MLB Associates              |    Embedded world

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

More information about the Ecos-discuss mailing list