On Tue, 2009-06-23 at 01:36 +0300, Yusuf Caglar AKYUZ wrote:
> Zach Welch wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > I will try to summarize the OpenOCD license situation for the community:
> > 
> > - OpenOCD is licensed under the GPL -- without exceptions.
> > - Binaries linking to FTD2XX may NOT be distributed.
> >   - Neither static nor shared, direct nor indirect.
> >   - There will be no future exceptions to this rule.
> > - Past "violations" will not be pursued, but we expect compliance now.
> > 
> > The "best for open source" solution will be to remedy all deficiencies
> > in libusb and libftdi, even if that takes more time and labor.  This
> > will provide a fully open source solution for users, which should be
> > preferred by the community of maintainers, contributors, and vendors.
> > Conversely, preference to the proprietary driver as a long-term solution
> > undermines the free software community and the freedoms of its users.
> > 
> > Until an open software solution manifests itself, there appear to be two
> > acceptable (if hard) workarounds to distribute binaries to end-users:
> > 
> > 1) A "build kit" can be distributed that compiles the source code from
> > scratch on the machine of each user that wants to use the closed FTD2XX
> > driver.  This solution can be developed in time for the 0.2.0 release.
> > Is someone already working on one and will share it with the community?
> > 
> 
> I'm currently trying this approach. I'm trying to build latest SVN
> head and preparing a simple wrapper GUI based on Qt, though it is a
> little bit slow on my Windows XP virtual machine.

Excellent!!  You will be praised highly for delivering such a solution,
so please keep the community apprised of your progress.

Out of sheer curiosity: how will your Qt wrapper be licensed? :) :)

Thanks,

Zach
_______________________________________________
Openocd-development mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development

Reply via email to