Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License
I can be wrong, but, anything that's been designed by an author, has authorship, and it makes it have copyright. I understand that for the footprints, and for the schematic symbols, they will mostly come from IPC/JEDEC or the datasheet. But even in the work of creating symbol libraries it's always a little artistic part, which may be covered under copyright. (For example Spanish law covers for derivative works -like translations, etc-, in the end we're translating from datasheet to kicad..., -you know law isn't black or white, but gray- ) So, I'm my opinion it's not that easy. I think that something interesting could be including a field in the libraries with the license model the author gave it, and encourage the use of licenses as open as possible (if we want the widest adoption for kicad). Cheers, Mike 2012/3/21 Brian F. G. Bidulock bidul...@openss7.org: Heiko, Footprints are not subject to copyright either. They are not creative: (if they are any good) they are simple data gathered from JEDEC, IPC and manufacturer sources. The same applies to standard symbols used in a schematic library. It's not worth worrying about: really. --brian On Wed, 21 Mar 2012, Heiko Rosemann wrote: Let me make a more general comment: I think this may be different in different countries. Plus, depending on the country, the authorities may or may not accept there is no international copyright protection on PCBs when someone sues someone else about violating some license with the help of kicad. So what I am saying is we should mention countries along with such statements, and before starting a re-licensing process, try and find out in which countries people would benefit from it. As you can see from my vagueness, I'm not really deep into the legalese. But from my understanding, the GPL does not enforce anyone to license their work under GPL if they are merely using the library (as in using it in a schematic/board, similar to linking a code library together with their program) but this is enforced if they are doing work based on the library (as in distributing another library using footprints from the GPLed library) I don't know if this clears anything up or further muddies the waters, but I hope for the first, -- Brian F. G. Bidulock ¦ The reasonable man adapts himself to the ¦ bidul...@openss7.org ¦ world; the unreasonable one persists in ¦ http://www.openss7.org/ ¦ trying to adapt the world to himself. ¦ ¦ Therefore all progress depends on the ¦ ¦ unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw ¦ ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp -- Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo http://www.nbee.es +34 636 52 25 69 skype: ajoajoajo ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Kicad-developers] EESCHEMA wire end length reduction
Le 22/03/2012 06:17, Dick Hollenbeck a écrit : On 03/21/2012 05:55 PM, Wayne Stambaugh wrote: On 3/21/2012 3:28 PM, Dick Hollenbeck wrote: I used to be able to shorten a wire by dragging its endpoint towards the opposite end. I also checked this out while I was checking the tab problem you were having with the Pin Properties dialog and I don't have this problem either. I can right click, select drag, and drag a wire end without any issues. Are you using the context menu or the hot key? Both of those work. After using the program for 5 years, I had grown accustomed to previous behavior which did not require selecting drag. You could simply use the wire tool and back trace over an existing track starting from its end, with a new track gesture. This used to shorten the wire. I can live with the single G key however. Dick I see... It is certainly a side effect of my bug fix bzr3467. Previously the SCH_LINE::MergeOverlap( SCH_LINE* aLine ) function tried to merge 2 collinear segments (wires, busses or graphic lines) by creating a segment from the starting point of the first to the ending point of the second. Therefore the intermediate point is not always the removed point. The result of merging 2 collinear segments connecting 2 pins can be: - a merging segment that still connect the 2 pins (the intermediate point was removed) - or a shorter segment between a pin and the end of the second segment (not necessary the pin) and a connection is lost ((the intermediate point was kept and an end point removed ). (I am thinking you were using the consequence of this bug) However, during calculations, for each segment, ends can be swapped, and you are not able to know in all cases the starting point end the ending point of a wire. Now the resulting segment connects the ends having the bigger distance, and in my example the 2 pins are always kept connected. I noticed this bug when I tried to create a rectangle (4 consecutive wires or graphic segments) in an empty sheet: Depending on the way the 4 edges are created (CW or CCW) one or 2 segments were lost (removed). (SCH_LINE::MergeOverlap( SCH_LINE* aLine ) is widely used in Eeschema after segments creations and netlist calculations). I was also able to create erroneous merges on existing complex connections with collinear wires and junctions. After creating a collinear wire on this kind of connections, some segments sometimes disappear. (and a wrong connection created) -- Jean-Pierre CHARRAS ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License
Footprints are not subject to copyright either. They are not creative: ... they are simple data gathered from JEDEC, IPC and manufacturer sources. Copyright is designed to protect the original expression of ideas, and not the ideas themselves. For example, if you take a photograph of the insides of your computer you are automatically the Copyright owner of the photograph. Your original expression is the overexposed and blurry image. In the same way that JEDEC/IPC/manufacturers own the Copyrights on the datasheets/specifications they produce, you own the specification (schematic and layout files) you produce of your design. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright#Idea-expression_dichotomy_and_the_merger_doctrine Everything but the actual circuit connection ideas can be Copyrighted since copy[right] covers only the expression of the definition, not the circuit itself. In other words, someone can redo your work and create something nearly identical and they will be the Copyright owners of that work. http://features.linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=1999-06-22-005-05-NW-LF http://www.armisteadtechnologies.com/copy-pcb.shtml http://freedomdefined.org/OSHW I can be wrong, but, anything that's been designed by an author, has authorship, and it makes it have copyright. That is the most sensible attitude. It's not worth worrying about: really. Why risk it. Anything that can lead to FUD from others and dissuade use of KiCad should be avoided. I would be willing to donate all my library work into the Public Domain under, for example, the Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication: http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ If the original authors of library elements cannot be contacted simply ask users of the KiCad mailing list to recreate schematic symbols and module footprints. I'm sure many users would be willing to help out and contribute. As noted earlier, it is the expression of an idea that is Copyrightable so it is mostly a simple matter of redoing the work. -Matt On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 4:28 AM, Brian F. G. Bidulock bidul...@openss7.org wrote: Miguel, On Thu, 22 Mar 2012, Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo wrote: I can be wrong, but, anything that's been designed by an author, has authorship, and it makes it have copyright. Sorry, it doesn't work that way. --brian -- Brian F. G. Bidulock ¦ The reasonable man adapts himself to the ¦ bidul...@openss7.org ¦ world; the unreasonable one persists in ¦ http://www.openss7.org/ ¦ trying to adapt the world to himself. ¦ ¦ Therefore all progress depends on the ¦ ¦ unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw ¦ ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License
I would highly recommend to avoid any copyright notices at all. Kicad is OpenSource and all contributors working in the best meaning of the OpenSource ideas. Introduction of copyright in any form may have fatal impact to the future of this wonderful software. Stop this thread, please! Martin Dne 22.3.2012 12:38, Opendous Support napsal(a): Footprints are not subject to copyright either. They are not creative: ... they are simple data gathered from JEDEC, IPC and manufacturer sources. Copyright is designed to protect the original expression of ideas, and not the ideas themselves. For example, if you take a photograph of the insides of your computer you are automatically the Copyright owner of the photograph. Your original expression is the overexposed and blurry image. In the same way that JEDEC/IPC/manufacturers own the Copyrights on the datasheets/specifications they produce, you own the specification (schematic and layout files) you produce of your design. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright#Idea-expression_dichotomy_and_the_merger_doctrine Everything but the actual circuit connection ideas can be Copyrighted since copy[right] covers only the expression of the definition, not the circuit itself. In other words, someone can redo your work and create something nearly identical and they will be the Copyright owners of that work. http://features.linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=1999-06-22-005-05-NW-LF http://www.armisteadtechnologies.com/copy-pcb.shtml http://freedomdefined.org/OSHW I can be wrong, but, anything that's been designed by an author, has authorship, and it makes it have copyright. That is the most sensible attitude. It's not worth worrying about: really. Why risk it. Anything that can lead to FUD from others and dissuade use of KiCad should be avoided. I would be willing to donate all my library work into the Public Domain under, for example, the Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication: http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ If the original authors of library elements cannot be contacted simply ask users of the KiCad mailing list to recreate schematic symbols and module footprints. I'm sure many users would be willing to help out and contribute. As noted earlier, it is the expression of an idea that is Copyrightable so it is mostly a simple matter of redoing the work. -Matt On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 4:28 AM, Brian F. G. Bidulock bidul...@openss7.org wrote: Miguel, On Thu, 22 Mar 2012, Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo wrote: I can be wrong, but, anything that's been designed by an author, has authorship, and it makes it have copyright. Sorry, it doesn't work that way. --brian -- Brian F. G. Bidulock¦ The reasonable man adapts himself to the ¦ bidul...@openss7.org¦ world; the unreasonable one persists in ¦ http://www.openss7.org/ ¦ trying to adapt the world to himself. ¦ ¦ Therefore all progress depends on the ¦ ¦ unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw ¦ ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License
Of course I meant licenses other than GPL or Creative Commons. Many of us are badly affected by the nasty things about ACTA Martin Dne 22.3.2012 13:49, Martijn Kuipers napsal(a): On Mar 22, 2012, at 1:32 PM, Martin wrote: I would highly recommend to avoid any copyright notices at all. Kicad is OpenSource and all contributors working in the best meaning of the OpenSource ideas. Introduction of copyright in any form may have fatal impact to the future of this wonderful software. GPL works because of copyright. Stop this thread, please! Ostrich Politics is not the solution. Avoiding license problems on libraries may be best tackled with a Creative Commons alike license, but I am not a lawyer. In fact, if the main developers agree, next time we add a symbol/footprint/part/documentation we could provide it under Creative Commons. /Martijn Martin Dne 22.3.2012 12:38, Opendous Support napsal(a): Footprints are not subject to copyright either. They are not creative: ... they are simple data gathered from JEDEC, IPC and manufacturer sources. Copyright is designed to protect the original expression of ideas, and not the ideas themselves. For example, if you take a photograph of the insides of your computer you are automatically the Copyright owner of the photograph. Your original expression is the overexposed and blurry image. In the same way that JEDEC/IPC/manufacturers own the Copyrights on the datasheets/specifications they produce, you own the specification (schematic and layout files) you produce of your design. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright#Idea-expression_dichotomy_and_the_merger_doctrine Everything but the actual circuit connection ideas can be Copyrighted since copy[right] covers only the expression of the definition, not the circuit itself. In other words, someone can redo your work and create something nearly identical and they will be the Copyright owners of that work. http://features.linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=1999-06-22-005-05-NW-LF http://www.armisteadtechnologies.com/copy-pcb.shtml http://freedomdefined.org/OSHW I can be wrong, but, anything that's been designed by an author, has authorship, and it makes it have copyright. That is the most sensible attitude. It's not worth worrying about: really. Why risk it. Anything that can lead to FUD from others and dissuade use of KiCad should be avoided. I would be willing to donate all my library work into the Public Domain under, for example, the Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication: http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ If the original authors of library elements cannot be contacted simply ask users of the KiCad mailing list to recreate schematic symbols and module footprints. I'm sure many users would be willing to help out and contribute. As noted earlier, it is the expression of an idea that is Copyrightable so it is mostly a simple matter of redoing the work. -Matt On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 4:28 AM, Brian F. G. Bidulock bidul...@openss7.org wrote: Miguel, On Thu, 22 Mar 2012, Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo wrote: I can be wrong, but, anything that's been designed by an author, has authorship, and it makes it have copyright. Sorry, it doesn't work that way. --brian -- Brian F. G. Bidulock¦ The reasonable man adapts himself to the ¦ bidul...@openss7.org¦ world; the unreasonable one persists in ¦ http://www.openss7.org/ ¦ trying to adapt the world to himself. ¦ ¦ Therefore all progress depends on the ¦ ¦ unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw ¦ ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Kicad-developers] EESCHEMA wire end length reduction
Both of those work. After using the program for 5 years, I had grown accustomed to previous behavior which did not require selecting drag. You could simply use the wire tool and back trace over an existing track starting from its end, with a new track gesture. This used to shorten the wire. I can live with the single G key however. Dick I see... It is certainly a side effect of my bug fix bzr3467. Previously the SCH_LINE::MergeOverlap( SCH_LINE* aLine ) function tried to merge 2 collinear segments (wires, busses or graphic lines) by creating a segment from the starting point of the first to the ending point of the second. Therefore the intermediate point is not always the removed point. The result of merging 2 collinear segments connecting 2 pins can be: - a merging segment that still connect the 2 pins (the intermediate point was removed) - or a shorter segment between a pin and the end of the second segment (not necessary the pin) and a connection is lost ((the intermediate point was kept and an end point removed ). (I am thinking you were using the consequence of this bug) However, during calculations, for each segment, ends can be swapped, and you are not able to know in all cases the starting point end the ending point of a wire. Now the resulting segment connects the ends having the bigger distance, and in my example the 2 pins are always kept connected. I noticed this bug when I tried to create a rectangle (4 consecutive wires or graphic segments) in an empty sheet: Depending on the way the 4 edges are created (CW or CCW) one or 2 segments were lost (removed). (SCH_LINE::MergeOverlap( SCH_LINE* aLine ) is widely used in Eeschema after segments creations and netlist calculations). I was also able to create erroneous merges on existing complex connections with collinear wires and junctions. After creating a collinear wire on this kind of connections, some segments sometimes disappear. (and a wrong connection created) Thanks Jean-Pierre for the explanation. The functionality to shorten a wire is there. I just have to press the G key, and that is not an inconvenience. Not knowing I had to do this was the inconvenience. :) Thanks much. ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License
On 03/22/2012 07:32 AM, Martin wrote: I would highly recommend to avoid any copyright notices at all. Kicad is OpenSource and all contributors working in the best meaning of the OpenSource ideas. Introduction of copyright in any form may have fatal impact to the future of this wonderful software. Stop this thread, please! Martin Hell no. Go away fool. (In five years I have never called anyone a fool.) Without copyright law you have no GPL. This is an important thread and I want it to continue. ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License
In fact, I think that GPL is a bad license for the libraries kicad libraries, (authorship details appart...), In my opinion: * GPL is perfect for all the *sourcecode of KiCad*, and that must be keept like that. * GPL license is bad for the* library parts or footprints* (at least LGPL or some kind of CC must be the minimum here). Why?, source code of project, completely open must be perfect for anyone, what we want is KiCad to go forward in development and features. But having so restrictive licenses like GPL in the preinstalled footprint or libraries could be a entrance barrier for many companies to use KiCad, and I think we all want many companies to use kicad, and if possible, put some effort in development, like Dick is doing from softplc, or I'm doing (just a little) from Nbee. So, why put entry barriers to KiCad growth if we can easily avoid it? :) 2012/3/22 Martin mar...@ok1rr.com: Of course I meant licenses other than GPL or Creative Commons. Many of us are badly affected by the nasty things about ACTA Martin Dne 22.3.2012 13:49, Martijn Kuipers napsal(a): On Mar 22, 2012, at 1:32 PM, Martin wrote: I would highly recommend to avoid any copyright notices at all. Kicad is OpenSource and all contributors working in the best meaning of the OpenSource ideas. Introduction of copyright in any form may have fatal impact to the future of this wonderful software. GPL works because of copyright. Stop this thread, please! Ostrich Politics is not the solution. Avoiding license problems on libraries may be best tackled with a Creative Commons alike license, but I am not a lawyer. In fact, if the main developers agree, next time we add a symbol/footprint/part/documentation we could provide it under Creative Commons. /Martijn Martin Dne 22.3.2012 12:38, Opendous Support napsal(a): Footprints are not subject to copyright either. They are not creative: ... they are simple data gathered from JEDEC, IPC and manufacturer sources. Copyright is designed to protect the original expression of ideas, and not the ideas themselves. For example, if you take a photograph of the insides of your computer you are automatically the Copyright owner of the photograph. Your original expression is the overexposed and blurry image. In the same way that JEDEC/IPC/manufacturers own the Copyrights on the datasheets/specifications they produce, you own the specification (schematic and layout files) you produce of your design. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright#Idea-expression_dichotomy_and_the_merger_doctrine Everything but the actual circuit connection ideas can be Copyrighted since copy[right] covers only the expression of the definition, not the circuit itself. In other words, someone can redo your work and create something nearly identical and they will be the Copyright owners of that work. http://features.linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=1999-06-22-005-05-NW-LF http://www.armisteadtechnologies.com/copy-pcb.shtml http://freedomdefined.org/OSHW I can be wrong, but, anything that's been designed by an author, has authorship, and it makes it have copyright. That is the most sensible attitude. It's not worth worrying about: really. Why risk it. Anything that can lead to FUD from others and dissuade use of KiCad should be avoided. I would be willing to donate all my library work into the Public Domain under, for example, the Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication: http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ If the original authors of library elements cannot be contacted simply ask users of the KiCad mailing list to recreate schematic symbols and module footprints. I'm sure many users would be willing to help out and contribute. As noted earlier, it is the expression of an idea that is Copyrightable so it is mostly a simple matter of redoing the work. -Matt On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 4:28 AM, Brian F. G. Bidulock bidul...@openss7.org wrote: Miguel, On Thu, 22 Mar 2012, Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo wrote: I can be wrong, but, anything that's been designed by an author, has authorship, and it makes it have copyright. Sorry, it doesn't work that way. --brian -- Brian F. G. Bidulock¦ The reasonable man adapts himself to the ¦ bidul...@openss7.org¦ world; the unreasonable one persists in ¦ http://www.openss7.org/ ¦ trying to adapt the world to himself. ¦ ¦ Therefore all progress depends on the ¦ ¦ unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw ¦ ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to :
Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License
On 03/22/2012 06:38 AM, Opendous Support wrote: Footprints are not subject to copyright either. They are not creative: ... they are simple data gathered from JEDEC, IPC and manufacturer sources. Copyright is designed to protect the original expression of ideas, and not the ideas themselves. For example, if you take a photograph of the insides of your computer you are automatically the Copyright owner of the photograph. Your original expression is the overexposed and blurry image. In the same way that JEDEC/IPC/manufacturers own the Copyrights on the datasheets/specifications they produce, you own the specification (schematic and layout files) you produce of your design. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright#Idea-expression_dichotomy_and_the_merger_doctrine Everything but the actual circuit connection ideas can be Copyrighted since copy[right] covers only the expression of the definition, not the circuit itself. In other words, someone can redo your work and create something nearly identical and they will be the Copyright owners of that work. http://features.linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=1999-06-22-005-05-NW-LF http://www.armisteadtechnologies.com/copy-pcb.shtml http://freedomdefined.org/OSHW I can be wrong, but, anything that's been designed by an author, has authorship, and it makes it have copyright. That is the most sensible attitude. It's not worth worrying about: really. Why risk it. Anything that can lead to FUD from others and dissuade use of KiCad should be avoided. I would be willing to donate all my library work into the Public Domain under, for example, the Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication: http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ If the original authors of library elements cannot be contacted simply ask users of the KiCad mailing list to recreate schematic symbols and module footprints. I'm sure many users would be willing to help out and contribute. As noted earlier, it is the expression of an idea that is Copyrightable so it is mostly a simple matter of redoing the work. -Matt Great posting Matt. We do have pending opportunities to formulate a strategy. So I think a plodding dialog is harmless and good. For example, we will be moving to s-expressions for schematic and board stuff (parts, footprints, schematics and boards). Some interesting questions that I hope will stimulate some thinking, and eventually some responses: 1) What are we to conclude when a conversion program changes the expression of an idea (to s-expressions)? Sounds not to be a copyright violation during the conversion, but an opportunity to re-establish a specific license or posture on the converted work. 2) Do we want the work invested in KiCad project schematic parts and footprints to add value to KiCad expressly, and not be available for *easy* use in other software packages? How important is this on a scale of 1-10? 3) What are the incentives for anyone to share their work in parts and footprints? Are they sufficient? ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License
Hello, if we look at what the GEDA guys do/did, I seem to understand that they licensed everything (software and libraries) under GNU GPL: https://github.com/bert/gschem-symbols Word-processor templates for open-source word processors are open-source tools like LibreOffice could be distributed under GPL without your final word-processor document having to be open source. Library components for an EDA software tool can represent (and often are) a great value and lots of work is often behind it. Such value makes it is worth protecting the libs with a proper license. I think we should continue this discussion without getting too excited. cheers fabrizio On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 3:19 PM, Dick Hollenbeck d...@softplc.com wrote: On 03/22/2012 07:32 AM, Martin wrote: I would highly recommend to avoid any copyright notices at all. Kicad is OpenSource and all contributors working in the best meaning of the OpenSource ideas. Introduction of copyright in any form may have fatal impact to the future of this wonderful software. Stop this thread, please! ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License
There is no universal copyright law accepted worldwide. So what copyright law? American, japanese, lesothean? Of course, we know the origin of GPL, everybody can read. The copyright law is in many countries a set of very stupid rubbish apparently created by non-computer people. So, before calling anyone fool you must be specific. Do you have a bad day, Dick? GPL as well as CC are clear and specific, therefore good. I believe a footnote about licensing without any further discussion would be sufficient. And without fools. Martin P.S. I am leaving the list. I don't need to be called a fool. Dne 22.3.2012 15:19, Dick Hollenbeck napsal(a): On 03/22/2012 07:32 AM, Martin wrote: I would highly recommend to avoid any copyright notices at all. Kicad is OpenSource and all contributors working in the best meaning of the OpenSource ideas. Introduction of copyright in any form may have fatal impact to the future of this wonderful software. Stop this thread, please! Martin Hell no. Go away fool. (In five years I have never called anyone a fool.) Without copyright law you have no GPL. This is an important thread and I want it to continue. ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License
On 03/22/2012 09:20 AM, Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo wrote: In fact, I think that GPL is a bad license for the libraries kicad libraries, (authorship details appart...), In my opinion: * GPL is perfect for all the *sourcecode of KiCad*, and that must be keept like that. * GPL license is bad for the*library parts or footprints* (at least LGPL or some kind of CC must be the minimum here). Why?, source code of project, completely open must be perfect for anyone, what we want is KiCad to go forward in development and features. But having so restrictive licenses like GPL in the preinstalled footprint or libraries could be a entrance barrier for many companies to use KiCad, and I think we all want many companies to use kicad, and if possible, put some effort in development, like Dick is doing from softplc, or I'm doing (just a little) from Nbee. So, why put entry barriers to KiCad growth if we can easily avoid it? :) The source code has not been part this discussion. I think your points are fairly representative of the community. In fact, I thought we were a little further into our conversation, that we had some slowly evolving consensus that we needed something better than the GPL for the part/footprint libraries. But what constitutes better? 1) a policy statement is needed, so the concerns of the original poster are addressed, who is representative of the kind of person who does not want barriers. Brian's statement is an *example* policy statement. 2) as part of that policy statement, we could clarify or change the license, or remove it by going public domain on the parts and footprints. My questions in the earlier email were intended to figure out what protections, if any, the project needs so we can best deal with need 2) above, and also to facilitate a turbo charging of footprint and part sharing. 3) 1) and 2) may dictate that some procedural changes regarding the contribution of parts and footprints come about. If new parts coming in are under copyright, (and I believe all new work is), some standing procedure may need to be in place to deal with that copyright on parts and footprints, or demo boards. Such as signing a contributor agreement (again based on (2) above). For example, if public domain is the choice, a declaration should be made to that effect. Otherwise perhaps agreement to the chosen license. This the formal way to do it. In my opinion, more important than the tentative adopter of KiCad, is the vigorous recycling and sharing of parts and footprints. So I do not want to throw the baby out with the bathwater. I don't think we are any where near optimum on sharing parts and footprints. This is a far bigger problem and more important than scaring folks away with a vague licensing issue. In fact, if you solve my concern, you will bring in more folks that way than making them comfortable with the parts/footprints licensing. I don't want the solution to one problem be a disincentive or impediment to another opportunity that we have, which is to turbo charge the sharing. So let's not do damage to a turbo-charging opportunity. Market share seems to be what we are after? Market share makes us what again? Proud? Great in the eyes of our children? I cannot remember, maybe I never knew. Dick ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License
On Mar 22, 2012, at 3:30 PM, Dick Hollenbeck wrote: On 03/22/2012 06:38 AM, Opendous Support wrote: Footprints are not subject to copyright either. They are not creative: ... they are simple data gathered from JEDEC, IPC and manufacturer sources. Copyright is designed to protect the original expression of ideas, and not the ideas themselves. For example, if you take a photograph of the insides of your computer you are automatically the Copyright owner of the photograph. Your original expression is the overexposed and blurry image. In the same way that JEDEC/IPC/manufacturers own the Copyrights on the datasheets/specifications they produce, you own the specification (schematic and layout files) you produce of your design. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright#Idea-expression_dichotomy_and_the_merger_doctrine Everything but the actual circuit connection ideas can be Copyrighted since copy[right] covers only the expression of the definition, not the circuit itself. In other words, someone can redo your work and create something nearly identical and they will be the Copyright owners of that work. http://features.linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=1999-06-22-005-05-NW-LF http://www.armisteadtechnologies.com/copy-pcb.shtml http://freedomdefined.org/OSHW I can be wrong, but, anything that's been designed by an author, has authorship, and it makes it have copyright. That is the most sensible attitude. It's not worth worrying about: really. Why risk it. Anything that can lead to FUD from others and dissuade use of KiCad should be avoided. I would be willing to donate all my library work into the Public Domain under, for example, the Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication: http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ If the original authors of library elements cannot be contacted simply ask users of the KiCad mailing list to recreate schematic symbols and module footprints. I'm sure many users would be willing to help out and contribute. As noted earlier, it is the expression of an idea that is Copyrightable so it is mostly a simple matter of redoing the work. -Matt Great posting Matt. We do have pending opportunities to formulate a strategy. So I think a plodding dialog is harmless and good. For example, we will be moving to s-expressions for schematic and board stuff (parts, footprints, schematics and boards). Some interesting questions that I hope will stimulate some thinking, and eventually some responses: 1) What are we to conclude when a conversion program changes the expression of an idea (to s-expressions)? Sounds not to be a copyright violation during the conversion, but an opportunity to re-establish a specific license or posture on the converted work. Normally translation (language-wise) are covered under copyright. So I think that means that GPL remains GPL, if the GPL can be asserted on symbol/footprint libraries. From reading the opinions in this thread it seems it can be licensed with the GPL. Whether or not a schema using a symbol then has to be GPL-ed is something which is unclear to me, and I wonder if the answer will be the same for each country where KiCad is used. 2) Do we want the work invested in KiCad project schematic parts and footprints to add value to KiCad expressly, and not be available for *easy* use in other software packages? How important is this on a scale of 1-10? 0. I think we should allow other programs to import/convert KiCad libraries. I have already seen people switching to Eagle because they feel it has the most complete library, even though they could import them. In my opinion, having a neutral license for parts and footprints is adding value to KiCad. 3) What are the incentives for anyone to share their work in parts and footprints? Are they sufficient? I think a upload part/footprint to KiCad button or the ability to share your libraries with (something like git/bzr) would be an incentive. This would allow a reseller (adafruit, rs, farnell, etc) to publish the parts/footprint in their libraries and you would add their repo as a library resource (or clone it). I think what is stopping people (guilty) from sharing parts and footprints is in the ease of submission. /Martijn ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License
Martin P.S. I am leaving the list. I don't need to be called a fool. Martin, Coming into our board room and telling the owners that they should not talk about something, a concern raised by a user, obviously did not sit well with me. I am willing to apologize for my (over) reaction if you are willing to apologize. Dick ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License
2012/3/22 Dick Hollenbeck d...@softplc.com: Market share seems to be what we are after? Market share makes us what again? Proud? Great in the eyes of our children? I cannot remember, maybe I never knew. More people using KiCad, means more free people, since they won't be tied to proprietary closed formats. For example, I have many designs in my company that I wish I could open, but, for what?, they can only be opened with Altium, so the comunity could not make any use of it they're tied to a proprietary software, that costs $6000. -- Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo http://www.nbee.es +34 636 52 25 69 skype: ajoajoajo ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License
On 03/22/2012 10:06 AM, Fabrizio Tappero wrote: Hello, if we look at what the GEDA guys do/did, I seem to understand that they licensed everything (software and libraries) under GNU GPL: https://github.com/bert/gschem-symbols Word-processor templates for open-source word processors are open-source tools like LibreOffice could be distributed under GPL without your final word-processor document having to be open source. Library components for an EDA software tool can represent (and often are) a great value and lots of work is often behind it. Such value makes it is worth protecting the libs with a proper license. I think we should continue this discussion without getting too excited. I agree. cheers fabrizio Let me simply point out that: 1) in 5 years, even with its own repo, its own mailing list, and its own team, I am not aware of any significant impact on the KiCad libraries from contributors. 2) 9 times out of 10, when I have to use a symbol, I have to make my own. Anything is better than this, including: a) deleting the KiCad library altogether from our project, thusly forming a need that can be fulfilled by a business or team according to its own charter, maybe a subscription service. I spend half my time in KiCad developing parts and footprint, at least. This is money. Because when I am not doing it, I'm paying somebody else to do it. b) farting in the wind. ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Kicad-developers] [PATCH] Middle mouse button pan for eeschema and pcbnew drawpanel
lajos, Just tried the patch. Seems to work well up until you hit a scroll bar travel limit, at which point the pointer slips relative to the dragging drawing. I found this disconcerting. Is it desirable and easy to make it work such that the pointer freezes its directional travel on the axis or axes which have hit a travel limit? It would be nice to try that mode. I think that as soon as you put the user in control with the middle mouse button, you have to honor the attachment that has been made with the mouse to the drawing during the panning. If you hit a travel limit, this is no reason to allow the mouse to continue to move. My first impression was that this was an unnatural response. Think about this. Dick On 03/17/2012 09:07 AM, lajos kamocsay wrote: Hello Dick- Sorry, totally missed the tab setting in my editor. Attached is the patch with the tabs removed. Note however that the files generated by wxformbuilder do have tabs: eeschema/dialogs/dialog_eeschema_options_base.cpp pcbnew/dialogs/dialog_general_options_BoardEditor_base.cpp I checked other wxformbuilder files and those have tabs also, so this is probably ok. If you need me to convert those, let me know. Thanks- -lajos On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 12:24 AM, Dick Hollenbeck d...@softplc.com wrote: Thanks lajos. Someone else is going to have to look at this one. But please do them a favor before they start: 1) Fix your tabs, make them 4 spaces. Tabs are not allowed in KiCad source code. 2) After fixing, send your patch as an attachment, not inline. Whoever reviews it may have more to say. Dick ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License
This discussion about the library license is a really interesting topic, made me think all day. I just want to put this out there first, so you know where I'm coming from: when I contribute code or content to an open source project, I mostly just want to share something I made, that I find useful, and hope that it would help or save someone else time. But getting credit is nice. Do I need to retain copyright? A quick excerpt from wikipedia: Copyright is a legal concept, enacted by most governments, giving the creator of an original work exclusive rights to it, usually for a limited time. Generally, it is the right to copy, but also gives the copyright holder the right to be credited for the work, to determine who may adapt the work to other forms, who may perform the work, who may financially benefit from it, and other related rights. This seems too restrictive, unless I also state that while I retain copyright, I allow anyone to use it for any purpose, personal or business. Creative Commons seems to be a license that does something similar, but whoever uses the content must give credit to the copyright holder. How would Kicad enforce that? Create a credits file in the directory for the 25 parts and modules I used, or would it have to print the credits on all schematics, or maybe even on all produced PCBs? I think finding the right licensing is tricky, and possibly would require the help of an ip lawyer. One example I liked was the library license from adafruit. From her website: Its released into the Public Domain - that means you can do whatever you want. We'd like it if you kept the author email/url in the part description, just so we can be alerted if there are errors. I think something like that would work for me. I'm not a lawyer, so please take all this only as food for thought. Thanks- -lajos On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 12:50 PM, Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo miguelan...@nbee.es wrote: 2012/3/22 Dick Hollenbeck d...@softplc.com: Market share seems to be what we are after? Market share makes us what again? Proud? Great in the eyes of our children? I cannot remember, maybe I never knew. More people using KiCad, means more free people, since they won't be tied to proprietary closed formats. For example, I have many designs in my company that I wish I could open, but, for what?, they can only be opened with Altium, so the comunity could not make any use of it they're tied to a proprietary software, that costs $6000. -- Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo http://www.nbee.es +34 636 52 25 69 skype: ajoajoajo ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License
On 03/22/2012 10:06 AM, Fabrizio Tappero wrote: Hello, if we look at what the GEDA guys do/did, I seem to understand that they licensed everything (software and libraries) under GNU GPL: https://github.com/bert/gschem-symbols Word-processor templates for open-source word processors are open-source tools like LibreOffice could be distributed under GPL without your final word-processor document having to be open source. Library components for an EDA software tool can represent (and often are) a great value and lots of work is often behind it. Such value makes it is worth protecting the libs with a proper license. Fabrizio, You seem to feel a proper license protect the libraries. Can you elaborate on how you think this is beneficial to both: a) users of libraries. b) contributors of library parts/footprints I am interested in your point of view. My point of view is not firm yet, other than that I know I am not a communist. I don't ever see communism working, no where, no how. So if what we have is communism, this explains why there are no significant parts in our libraries. My earlier remarks are NOT a knock on those who signed up to improve our libraries. It is just a recognition that communism does not work. Somebody has to design a better *process* for sharing parts/footprints. I think this means somebody makes money doing it. You don't like this idea? Then suggest one that actually might work. What we have is clearly NOT working. Anybody file that wxformbuilder bug report yet? Dick ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Kicad-developers] [PATCH] Middle mouse button pan for eeschema and pcbnew drawpanel
Hi Dick-- Thanks for taking looking at it. When I worked on this, I looked at the mose wheel + [ctrl | shift] behavior, which (at least in my build) was also limited to the scroll bar length. I agree with you however that removing that limit would work better, I can certainly take a crack at it. Thanks- -lajos On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 3:45 PM, Dick Hollenbeck d...@softplc.com wrote: lajos, Just tried the patch. Seems to work well up until you hit a scroll bar travel limit, at which point the pointer slips relative to the dragging drawing. I found this disconcerting. Is it desirable and easy to make it work such that the pointer freezes its directional travel on the axis or axes which have hit a travel limit? It would be nice to try that mode. I think that as soon as you put the user in control with the middle mouse button, you have to honor the attachment that has been made with the mouse to the drawing during the panning. If you hit a travel limit, this is no reason to allow the mouse to continue to move. My first impression was that this was an unnatural response. Think about this. Dick On 03/17/2012 09:07 AM, lajos kamocsay wrote: Hello Dick- Sorry, totally missed the tab setting in my editor. Attached is the patch with the tabs removed. Note however that the files generated by wxformbuilder do have tabs: eeschema/dialogs/dialog_eeschema_options_base.cpp pcbnew/dialogs/dialog_general_options_BoardEditor_base.cpp I checked other wxformbuilder files and those have tabs also, so this is probably ok. If you need me to convert those, let me know. Thanks- -lajos On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 12:24 AM, Dick Hollenbeck d...@softplc.com wrote: Thanks lajos. Someone else is going to have to look at this one. But please do them a favor before they start: 1) Fix your tabs, make them 4 spaces. Tabs are not allowed in KiCad source code. 2) After fixing, send your patch as an attachment, not inline. Whoever reviews it may have more to say. Dick ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License
As an example of how lawyered-up EDA companies treat libraries, refer to section 3.1 and 3.2 of the Altium EULA: http://www.altium.com/products/eula.cfm Their EULA restricts use of libraries to their products. You cannot restrict the use of something you do not own so I assume Altium's lawyers believe they own the copyright to their libraries. In section 1.14 they seem to be stating that anything a user designs with their software is licensed to that user, not owned by them, as that would imply transfer of ownership of Altium's materials. None of us are lawyers so let us tread carefully. I vote for Public Domain'ing anything KiCad users need to move outside of KiCad. http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ From reading the opinions in this thread it seems it can be licensed with the GPL. Whether or not a schema using a symbol then has to be GPL-ed is something which is unclear to me, and I wonder if the answer will be the same for each country where KiCad is used. Exactly. It is unclear so why risk it? From personal experience there are really only about 50 standard symbols and footprints that must be included for basic functionality. This isn't a massive amount of work to redo if necessary. having a neutral license for parts and footprints is adding value to KiCad. Is that another vote for CC0 (Public Domain)? 1) What are we to conclude when a conversion program changes the expression of an idea (to s-expressions)? I assume copyright is maintained through a format conversion. If you copy a movie from VHS to DVD you do not gain copyright of the work. 2) Do we want the work invested in KiCad project schematic parts and footprints to add value to KiCad expressly, and not be available for *easy* use in other software packages? How important is this on a scale of 1-10? I say extend the ideals of the GPL throughout KiCad. No use restrictions. 3) What are the incentives for anyone to share their work in parts and footprints? Are they sufficient? I have no objection to readily sharing my symbols and footprints under as loose a licence as possible, such as CC0 (Public Domain). I regularly create my own symbols as most parts I use are not standard and I have a schematic style I try to follow. I also create my own footprints to tweak things for either minimal board area or easier DIY'ability. However, the symbols and footprints have no value outside of the design process as far as I can tell. It is work that needs to be done but has no value on its own. Contributing such work to KiCad at least gets me a shout-out. I don't see any significant competitive advantage to not sharing. In fact, having someone check my work is an advantage. There isn't really much of an incentive to share. There also isn't any real incentive not to share. In an ideal world all IC manufacturers would create simple text pinout files such as those the FPGA companies (Xilinx, Altera, Lattice) create for their components. Users could run such files through custom symbol generators to create libraries that fit their own style. http://www.altera.com/literature/dp/cyclone-iv/EP4CE6.txt a policy statement is needed ... clarify or change the license ... [due to above] some procedural changes regarding the contribution of parts and footprints come about. If new parts coming in are under copyright, (and I believe all new work is), some standing procedure may need to be in place to deal with that copyright on parts, footprints, demos boards. Such as signing a contributor agreement How about a new KiCad mailing list for symbols and footprints? There could be a simple procedure for posting and a template for how to assign the work. This would simplify library contributions vs. the hassle of Launchpad. The Subject line could be LibraryType - License - Name - Description, e.g., (Footprint - CC0 - SOT223 - SMT 3-Pin) or (Symbol - GPL - 1117 - 1A LDO). The library element could be an attachment. The submitter would have to state in the body of the message that they are the copyright owner and are licensing accordingly. I don't think we are any where near optimum on sharing parts and footprints. This is a far bigger problem and more important than scaring folks away with a vague licensing issue ... if you solve my concern, you will bring in more folks that way than making them comfortable with the parts/footprints licensing. One of the most useful principles of the GPL is that you do not need anyone's permission to use or create GPL-licensed content. Does there exist a simple multi-user, no registration version control system that would be better than the above mailing list proposal? Launchpad is too much of a hassle for the casual user and there needs to be search facilities. Unless someone can fund and develop a website such as Thingiverse.com for KiCad libraries we are stuck piggy-backing on other services. Market share seems to be what we are after? I'm after usability.
Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License
Totally agree with your point: 2) 9 times out of 10, when I have to use a symbol, I have to make my own. Even if I use a module from the library, I have to check it. It's better to find out in pcbnew if a footprint doesn't match rather than after etching and drilling a hundred holes. Just the other day I found that the TO220 module and the schematic didn't match, the Vin and GND pin numbers were swapped. This is off topic, but the only way I can imagine having a reliable library is an online server where users could up/download schematics and modules directly from kicad and others could leave feedback about the accuracy. -lajos On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 3:13 PM, Dick Hollenbeck d...@softplc.com wrote: On 03/22/2012 10:06 AM, Fabrizio Tappero wrote: Hello, if we look at what the GEDA guys do/did, I seem to understand that they licensed everything (software and libraries) under GNU GPL: https://github.com/bert/gschem-symbols Word-processor templates for open-source word processors are open-source tools like LibreOffice could be distributed under GPL without your final word-processor document having to be open source. Library components for an EDA software tool can represent (and often are) a great value and lots of work is often behind it. Such value makes it is worth protecting the libs with a proper license. I think we should continue this discussion without getting too excited. I agree. cheers fabrizio Let me simply point out that: 1) in 5 years, even with its own repo, its own mailing list, and its own team, I am not aware of any significant impact on the KiCad libraries from contributors. 2) 9 times out of 10, when I have to use a symbol, I have to make my own. Anything is better than this, including: a) deleting the KiCad library altogether from our project, thusly forming a need that can be fulfilled by a business or team according to its own charter, maybe a subscription service. I spend half my time in KiCad developing parts and footprint, at least. This is money. Because when I am not doing it, I'm paying somebody else to do it. b) farting in the wind. ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Kicad-developers] Library License
Just wanted to throw in my 2 cents, from someone who is all *too* familiar with these types of discussions. * Libraries and modules distributed with Kicad should be public domain for maximum flexibility. I would assume Kicad is meant to be used in a commercial environment and I'd hate to have to create all my own libraries for things as trivial as power pins. Enforcing public domain for the library/module content distributed with the program, I would think encourage more participation from anyone using Kicad in a commercial context (who would want to contribute content to a body of work they can't even effectively utilize?). * An online sharing database of libraries/footprints would be awesome. Licensing in this case could be flexible and definable by the author, though I would think public domain should be encouraged. I also spend a large amount of my own time creating footprints and libraries, due to lack or difficulty finding quality content. If there was such a concise easy to contribute to database, I would happily contribute to it. * User contributed content could be extracted from this online database for use in Kicad, provided it is public domain and follows certain guidelines, which should be defined for a concise module and library resource. This last item is pretty important in order to keep Kicad libraries and modules consistent and the most generally usable in situations. I often end up creating my own libraries and footprints because of issues with the ones distributed with Kicad. Some guidelines and organization is needed to really make it more useful. Again, just some common sense from someone standing on the sidelines of Kicad development. Best regards, Element Green ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
