On Thursday 03 April 2008, Jiri Gaisler wrote: > Markus Schaber wrote: > > Additionally, our company has the policy that any substantial > > contribution must be copy-lefted, so no-one else can make closed-source > > derivates. > > > > Copyright assignment creates a single point of failure against > > closed-source derivates, weakening the copyleft. > > I completely agree with Markus. We are hesitant to contribute our > leon2/3 port and drivers because we do not want to have closed-source > distributions (e.g. eCos Pro) using our code without contributing > back fixes or improvements. The ideal solution would be to license
So GPL or LGPL would be ok for you ? > the eCos code in LGPL. This would allow mixing proprietary applications > with the kernel, while force any improvements or bug fixes to be > published. Well, and it would enforce that company ship their firmware as object files or relinkable static libraries, so that this together with the LGPL part (eCos then) could be relinked to a working firmware image. I think that's not a very practical solution. Alex -- Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss
