On 5/21/2014 5:43 PM, Amar Takhar wrote: > On 2014-05-22 08:24 +1000, Chris Johns wrote: > <snip> >> It says it is GPLv3 on the download page and further states "Partitions >> are GPL execution environments." and this is something we cannot accept. >> It makes testing in our test servers an issue because the person >> responsible for running the tests needs to make sure all the licenses >> are valid and I will not do that and I suspect Amar will not either. > No, I will not do that. We should not expect users to do so, either. > > >> I am sorry but I do not see how we can support this VM within RTEMS. > Neither, unless they decide to change the license. > We have long been against including anything in the main RTEMS source that would put a user on a path to unknowingly violate a license or contaminate their code. I don't see how that principle can be upheld with this BSP.
FWIW I am generally opposed to supporting dual-licensed projects by the community from a business/resource viewpoint. The community is investing our precious effort into making sure something works with RTEMS that our users can't use without paying someone money. Effectively we are maintaining something solely so they can sell a license to someone who uses it. So far, I haven't seen any dual-licensed projects step up and make that effort worth the community's time. I believe in open and free software and know that some will abuse my time and contributions by not reciprocating. But I don't have to be slapped in the face with it. > Amar. -- Joel Sherrill, Ph.D. Director of Research & Development joel.sherr...@oarcorp.com On-Line Applications Research Ask me about RTEMS: a free RTOS Huntsville AL 35805 Support Available (256) 722-9985 _______________________________________________ rtems-devel mailing list rtems-devel@rtems.org http://www.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/rtems-devel
