Re: [Openocd-development] License

[Zach W. <zw...@su...>]

On Tue, 2009-06-23 at 23:52 +0200, Øyvind Harboe wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 11:41 PM, Zach Welch<zw...@su...> wrote:
> > On Tue, 2009-06-23 at 23:37 +0200, Øyvind Harboe wrote:
> >> > You will need to get confirmation from other contributors, as I think
> >> > the actual revision might be far lower than anyone realizes presently.
> >>
> >> I started my contributions at svn 214 (or earlier, not easy to see
> >> from a cursory look at the logs).
> >
> > Just so we are clear (in this thread), are you for or against adding an
> > exception to the GPL?
> 
> Against currently.
> 
> The current technical problems are just a tiny bump in the road
> compared to the >2000 revisions  we have in SVN.
> 
> We need a robust license(GPL is that) and we need to make sure that
> all the things we want open stay open. Who's to say what the effects
> of an exception would be? Where would it start? Where would it stop?
> 
> There are LOTS of closed source hardware debuggers out the(good ones,
> we use them every day). The whole point of OpenOCD is that it is ... open.

I would like to point out that my latest (and long) reply to David
Brownell explains that we have outlined the door for giving away
compatibility with closed-source solutions.  It will only be a matter of
time until it has been opened enough for vendors to walk through, though
whether or not any choose to do so remains a bigger question in my mind.

The GPL v2 poses no obstacles here, for the technically adept.

Cheers,

Zach