Red eCos: Going, Going, Gone

[Jonathan Larmour]

Andrew Lunn wrote:
>>This would be from the maintainers not eCosCentric BTW :-). So anything 
>>eCosCentric-y wouldn't be covered in that correction. It's up to 
>>eCosCentric to do that if they want, although they (err... we (oh this is 
>>confusing)) could follow up to such an article themselves of course if they 
>>wish.
> 
> 
> Any idea how you will introduce this text to make it clear its from
> the maintainers not eCosCentric? As you say, its confusing, and you
> known the difference!

For a start I can send it from my personal e-mail addr. And the point is 
that I'm not going to put it out until you other guys are okay with it, at 
which point that allows me to say something like:

Recently an article was published in SD Times about eCos and the proposed 
copyright assignment of Red Hat owned portions to the FSF. Unfortunately a 
number of factual errors were made in the article, and the eCos maintainers 
would like to be able to inform and reassure eCos users about the content 
of that article, an uncorrected version of which may be found at 
http://sdtimes.com/news/096/emb1.htm

[etc.]

so since it says it's from the maintainers and there's no mention of 
eCosCentric, I hope that would do...... but of course, duh, I've just 
realised you could post it too :-). I'm not really bothered which of us 
does it. Yeah, do that once we're sure no-one has any issues with it (we've 
waited a while already, so waiting a couple more days in case people are 
out of town is fine).

> The text itself is great.

Just trying to keep it to the facts anyway. Feel free to nitpick if I've 
introduced any slant!

Jifl
-- 
eCosCentric    http://www.eCosCentric.com/    The eCos and RedBoot experts
 >>>>> Visit us in booth 2527 at the Embedded Systems Conference 2004 <<<<<
March 30 - April 1, San Francisco http://www.esconline.com/electronicaUSA/
--["No sense being pessimistic, it wouldn't work anyway"]-- Opinions==mine