Andrew Lunn wrote:
So the copyright assignment would only come into the picture for new
code.
Correct. You could assign your modification, which you have copyright
to, but without the rest of the code they are probably useless.
Agreed. So how would that part of the code need to be licensed to allow
public use. The modified code is all in the same file as the eCos code,
so does it automatically come under the eCos license? Is no assignment
necessary for the mod GPL?
There are also a couple of files that have been taken from eCos and
modified. Since these files would also need to be released under GPL,
should the eCos license at the top of the file be removed and the GPL be
inserted instead? Or should we include both?
Since you don't own the eCos code, you are not allowed to take the
license off.
You can distribute code with different licenses on different files. So
it is O.K. to have some files with eCos mod GPL and others with
GPL.
If the code you added to standard eCos files was all your own code,
you can keep just the eCos mod GPL license on these files, assuming
you wish to license your modifications under the eCos mod GPL license.
If the modifications use GPL code, you should add the GPL header as
well as the eCos mod GPL header.
I'm guessing that an ecosforge/ sourceforge page would be what we are
looking for. We would probably need to add something on the home page
specifying that it is GPL code. Plus the files would carry the license
as well. Would that be enough?
Yes, that is good.
Andrew
--
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss
