Hey Ivan, Thank you for the response.
On Tue, May 05, 2015 at 10:14:58AM +0000, De Cesaris, Ivan wrote: > There's also normally a period when the parts are not public but > under NDA for selected partners and not just internal anymore. > These partners will need tools for the new Si and, once again, it's > not about the kind of NDA, it's that GPL discloses the IP, ergo I > can't have non-public IP and GPL code. AFAICT, this is not meaningful because there's no such thing as "IP" legal-wise. "Imaginary Property" is not a real property, it's something invented by dirty lawyers to confuse the others. Please see [1] for an elaborate explanation. Basically, when you distribute GPLd code, it's just the source code (a copyrighted _text_ i.e. a combination of characters) you disclose. > By having the license we have now for OpenOCD the "intermediate" > phase can't be covered, that's a fact and only changing the OpenOCD > license could make it possible. The usecase you describe is valid, I do not oppose that. But I'm afraid allowing BSD-like terms for everybody would do more harm than good, as the other vendors might decide to not contribute back if they're not forced too... > This has nothing to do with keeping the code changes private or not > going back upstream, it's about the timeline of these contributions. Understood, that would work fine with nice vendors. But not everyone is nice, unfortunately. > And we all know that having GPL code doesn't prevent usages which > are not really good for the community, like non-upstreamed forks > adding less than stellar code which would be a nightmare to merge! Closed-source forks seem to be even worse than that. > well, I'm not really "back" as I never left OpenOCD development, > quite the contrary, hopefully we'll see new stuff not far in the > future! Heh, I was judging by the lack of activity on http://openocd.zylin.com/#/c/2290/ . > I'll send the GPL change request to our legal guys, I didn't take > part in the initial definition so it might just have been an > oversight on both sides - don't expect a quick answer here though That would be nice to resolve, please do not let it slip through the cracks. > good catches with CLANG, I'll make sure we'll have some fun in my > team here fixing all of them! I also suggest you do some tests with runtime address sanitizer and valgrind, it might uncover more issues. Some are not related to your code of course, feel free to ignore those. [1] https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/not-ipr.html -- Be free, use free (http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html) software! mailto:[email protected] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y _______________________________________________ OpenOCD-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openocd-devel
