[ECOS] Red Hat backs away from eCos?

[ECOS] Red Hat backs away from eCos?

[Bruce Smith]

http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS5933176616.html

According to this article it is true. And from what I can tell Red Hat have 
no eCos programmers left to support existing customers either.

Anyone from Red Hat care to comment?

regards
bruce


_________________________________________________________________
Join the worldÂ’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. 
http://www.hotmail.com


-- 
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://sources.redhat.com/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss

Re: [ECOS] Red Hat backs away from eCos?

[Michael Kelly]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii", Size: 1758 bytes --]

HI,

For what it's worth, I say good riddance.  Red Hat never knew what
to do with eCOs or even GNU for that matter.  Now that the eCos
source is GPL'ed (with appropriate modifiers for embedded use), I
believe it will take off.  I intend to show my support by working with 
some of the developers to create board/eCos bundles for development
use.  I encourage all of the board vendors out there to do the same.

And as for end users, support eCos by working with the developers
and funding the projects.  Maybe now they can take on reasonable
size jobs since they do not have to meet the inflated levels of revenue
Red Hat expected of each customer.

Anyway, I think an eCos free from Red Hat is good for the embedded
world and I do not believe it will die off. 

Regards,
Michael

At 06:40 AM 6/19/2002 -0700, Bruce Smith wrote:
>http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS5933176616.html
>
>According to this article it is true. And from what I can tell Red Hat have no eCos programmers left to support existing customers either.
>
>Anyone from Red Hat care to comment?
>
>regards
>bruce
>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com
>
>
>-- 
>Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://sources.redhat.com/fom/ecos
>and search the list archive: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss

Michael J. Kelly
VP Engineering/Marketing
Cogent Computer Systems, Inc.
1130 Ten Rod Road
Suite A-201
North Kingstown, RI 02852
tel:401-295-6505 fax:401-295-6507
www.cogcomp.com
alternate email: mkelly6505@hotmail.com


-- 
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://sources.redhat.com/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss

Re: [ECOS] Red Hat backs away from eCos?

[Grant Edwards]

On Wed, Jun 19, 2002 at 09:56:37AM -0400, Michael Kelly wrote:

> For what it's worth, I say good riddance.  Red Hat never knew what
> to do with eCOs or even GNU for that matter.  Now that the eCos
> source is GPL'ed

What?  I was aware that the RHEPL was being modified to make it "GPL
compatible". Is that what you mean by "eCos source is GPL'ed" or has the old
license been tossed out and replaces with the GPL?

> (with appropriate modifiers for embedded use), I believe it will take off.
> I intend to show my support by working with some of the developers to
> create board/eCos bundles for development use.  I encourage all of the
> board vendors out there to do the same.
> 
> And as for end users, support eCos by working with the developers and
> funding the projects.  Maybe now they can take on reasonable size jobs
> since they do not have to meet the inflated levels of revenue Red Hat
> expected of each customer.
> 
> Anyway, I think an eCos free from Red Hat is good for the embedded world
> and I do not believe it will die off.

We're using eCos in a couple products, and we're wondering where eCos is
going to reside now that RH has abandonded it. Where is the "official"
source for eCos going to be?

-- 
Grant Edwards
grante@visi.com

-- 
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://sources.redhat.com/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss

Re: [ECOS] Red Hat backs away from eCos?

[Gary Thomas]

On Wed, 2002-06-19 at 22:35, Grant Edwards wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 19, 2002 at 09:56:37AM -0400, Michael Kelly wrote:
> 
> > For what it's worth, I say good riddance.  Red Hat never knew what
> > to do with eCOs or even GNU for that matter.  Now that the eCos
> > source is GPL'ed
> 
> What?  I was aware that the RHEPL was being modified to make it "GPL
> compatible". Is that what you mean by "eCos source is GPL'ed" or has the old
> license been tossed out and replaces with the GPL?
> 

Yes, since late May with the alpha v2.0 release, eCos is now licensed 
under the GPL (with an exception which makes it suitable for embedded
use).  The only exception to this is the network stacks which were 
derived from *BSD which are covered by separate license terms (dictated
by the *BSD world).

> > (with appropriate modifiers for embedded use), I believe it will take off.
> > I intend to show my support by working with some of the developers to
> > create board/eCos bundles for development use.  I encourage all of the
> > board vendors out there to do the same.
> > 
> > And as for end users, support eCos by working with the developers and
> > funding the projects.  Maybe now they can take on reasonable size jobs
> > since they do not have to meet the inflated levels of revenue Red Hat
> > expected of each customer.
> > 
> > Anyway, I think an eCos free from Red Hat is good for the embedded world
> > and I do not believe it will die off.
> 
> We're using eCos in a couple products, and we're wondering where eCos is
> going to reside now that RH has abandonded it. Where is the "official"
> source for eCos going to be?
> 

Red Hat will continue to provide support for the eCos repository at its
current location (http://sources.redhat.com/ecos/) for the foreseeable
future.
 


-- 
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://sources.redhat.com/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss

Re: [ECOS] Red Hat backs away from eCos?

[Grant Edwards]

On Thu, Jun 20, 2002 at 10:20:22AM -0600, Gary Thomas wrote:

> > > For what it's worth, I say good riddance.  Red Hat never knew
> > > what to do with eCOs or even GNU for that matter.  Now that the
> > > eCos source is GPL'ed
> > 
> > What?  I was aware that the RHEPL was being modified to make it "GPL
> > compatible". Is that what you mean by "eCos source is GPL'ed" or has the old
> > license been tossed out and replaces with the GPL?
> 
> Yes, since late May with the alpha v2.0 release, eCos is now licensed 
> under the GPL (with an exception which makes it suitable for embedded
> use).

Thanks.  I had misunderstood the 2.0 license changes.  The
older versions are still under the previous license, right?

> The only exception to this is the network stacks which were
> derived from *BSD which are covered by separate license terms
> (dictated by the *BSD world).
>
> > We're using eCos in a couple products, and we're wondering
> > where eCos is going to reside now that RH has abandonded it.
> > Where is the "official" source for eCos going to be?
> 
> Red Hat will continue to provide support for the eCos
> repository at its current location
> (http://sources.redhat.com/ecos/) for the foreseeable future.

Presuming that development continues, who decides what goes
into the repository and what doesn't?

-- 
Grant Edwards
grante@visi.com

-- 
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://sources.redhat.com/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss

Re: [ECOS] Red Hat backs away from eCos?

[Gary Thomas]

On Thu, 2002-06-20 at 10:27, Grant Edwards wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 20, 2002 at 10:20:22AM -0600, Gary Thomas wrote:
> 
> > > > For what it's worth, I say good riddance.  Red Hat never knew
> > > > what to do with eCOs or even GNU for that matter.  Now that the
> > > > eCos source is GPL'ed
> > > 
> > > What?  I was aware that the RHEPL was being modified to make it "GPL
> > > compatible". Is that what you mean by "eCos source is GPL'ed" or has the old
> > > license been tossed out and replaces with the GPL?
> > 
> > Yes, since late May with the alpha v2.0 release, eCos is now licensed 
> > under the GPL (with an exception which makes it suitable for embedded
> > use).
> 
> Thanks.  I had misunderstood the 2.0 license changes.  The
> older versions are still under the previous license, right?
> 

I don't see any way that could change since it's open source. (IANAL)

> > The only exception to this is the network stacks which were
> > derived from *BSD which are covered by separate license terms
> > (dictated by the *BSD world).
> >
> > > We're using eCos in a couple products, and we're wondering
> > > where eCos is going to reside now that RH has abandonded it.
> > > Where is the "official" source for eCos going to be?
> > 
> > Red Hat will continue to provide support for the eCos
> > repository at its current location
> > (http://sources.redhat.com/ecos/) for the foreseeable future.
> 
> Presuming that development continues, who decides what goes
> into the repository and what doesn't?

As before, but [hopefully] with a larger set of contributors.



-- 
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://sources.redhat.com/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss

Re: [ECOS] Red Hat backs away from eCos?

[Jonathan Larmour]

Gary Thomas wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 2002-06-20 at 10:27, Grant Edwards wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 20, 2002 at 10:20:22AM -0600, Gary Thomas wrote:
> >
> > > > > For what it's worth, I say good riddance.  Red Hat never knew
> > > > > what to do with eCOs or even GNU for that matter.  Now that the
> > > > > eCos source is GPL'ed
> > > >
> > > > What?  I was aware that the RHEPL was being modified to make it "GPL
> > > > compatible". Is that what you mean by "eCos source is GPL'ed" or has the old
> > > > license been tossed out and replaces with the GPL?
> > >
> > > Yes, since late May with the alpha v2.0 release, eCos is now licensed
> > > under the GPL (with an exception which makes it suitable for embedded
> > > use).
> >
> > Thanks.  I had misunderstood the 2.0 license changes.  The
> > older versions are still under the previous license, right?
> >
> 
> I don't see any way that could change since it's open source. (IANAL)

Indeed, absolutely not. You can check the last RHEPL'd version out of CVS
by using the CVS tag "last-rhepl". See
http://sources.redhat.com/ecos/anoncvs.html

> > Presuming that development continues, who decides what goes
> > into the repository and what doesn't?
> 
> As before, but [hopefully] with a larger set of contributors.

It is likely to follow the GCC style with a small cabal[1] :-) of
maintainers approving patches, and either applying them themselves or
giving write access to the repository for people to make changes
themselves. But all patches would be posted, i.e. everything stays open.

An issue that will come up for the maintainers is copyright assignments.
Most people here will probably think they should no longer be a
requirement, but things aren't as clear as that. But that's a discussion
that will happen on the maintainers list. Right now, we're holding back on
moving forward with these types of proposals for the time being for various
reasons that will hopefully be resolved shortly.

Jifl
[1] TINC
-- 
--[ "You can complain because roses have thorns, or you ]--
--[  can rejoice because thorns have roses." -Lincoln   ]-- Opinions==mine

-- 
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://sources.redhat.com/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss

Re: [ECOS] Red Hat backs away from eCos?

[Christopher Faylor]

On Thu, Jun 20, 2002 at 10:20:22AM -0600, Gary Thomas wrote:
>Red Hat will continue to provide support for the eCos repository at its
>current location (http://sources.redhat.com/ecos/) for the foreseeable
>future.

Just in case you needed someone with a redhat.com domain to verify: Gary
is 100% correct.  The eCos repository will always have a welcome home on
sources.redhat.com.

I can't speak with authority on much else regarding eCos but I can, at
least, provide this much assurance.

cgf

-- 
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://sources.redhat.com/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss

Re: [ECOS] Red Hat backs away from eCos?

[Jonathan Larmour]

"Tim Drury (by way of Tim Drury )" wrote:
> 
> Since I'm just starting a commercial project based on eCos, I'd just like
> to find out what happens from here?  Will development continue as it
> is or will the code base be moved to sourceforge or some place
> similar?

The intention is very much to keep eCos at sources.redhat.com, for now at
least. Development will continue, and in a more open style with non-Red
Hat  and non ex-Red Hat people being part of the maintainership for the
Open Source project. It is GPL'd after all.

> I'm not worried that RedHat dropped it, but I'd just like to know if there
> is a definite path from here.
> 
> And good luck to those that got laid off.

Ta.

Jifl
-- 
--[ "You can complain because roses have thorns, or you ]--
--[  can rejoice because thorns have roses." -Lincoln   ]-- Opinions==mine

-- 
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://sources.redhat.com/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss

Re: [ECOS] Red Hat backs away from eCos?

[Scott Dattalo]

On Thu, 20 Jun 2002, Kjell Svensson wrote:

<snip>

> 
> "Jim" (jyl087@netscape.net) suggested that chip manufacturers should 
> form a coalition group sponsoring further eCos development. While I 
> believe this is a beautiful idea, my experience with silicon 
> manufacturers unfortunately makes me pessimistic to whether this would 
> be realistic.
> 
> Instead, I'd suggest that we who are today part of the eCos user 
> community join together, founding and sponsoring an eCos startup company 
> who could safely bring a truly open-source eCos further!
> If we move on fast, hopefully we could maybe even attract some of the 
> original eCos developers to this eCos startup before they will have to 
> switch over to other businesses
> While I doubt such a company would be able to produce revenue levels 
> interesting enough to a VC, I'm positive that it could safely provide a 
> sound financial ground for a smaller number of developers continuing the 
> eCos development in a truly open-source spirit. And with the help from 
> contributions from a more dedicated "sponsorship community", I believe 
> the speed of furter eCos development could even be improved.

From my perspective, this approach will fail for the same reasons a Redhat 
sponsored eCos has failed. As a new comer to eCos I can cite the reasons 
why I find it attractive:

1) Cheaper than any other Embedded RTOS. 
2) There is a mature tool-suite.
3) It's relatively easy to evaluate

I suppose many developers will cite these reasons. Now Redhat's eCos 
business model was to sell services such as porting eCos to custom 
hardware, writing drivers, or more thorough technical support. eCos, from 
my perspective, has matured to the point that porting to new hardware and 
writing drivers is a relatively simple matter of looking around for a 
project that is similar enough to yours and begin using it as a template.

For the technical side, it's clear from the traffic that I've seen on this 
list (and, I might add, have generated) that many eCos users attempt to 
solve the technical issues by wading through the details and asking very 
narrow, focused questions. In other words, it's not apparent to me from 
the messages I'm seeing on this list that people are actively using GNUpro 
and the support that comes with it.

In my personal case, once I get my eCos-based application up and running 
there is a chance others at my company will have to maintain it. At that 
point, I'd like to make that as easy as possible for them. In this 
instance, I might consider purchasing a professionally package tool. But 
then again, I might not...

In short, I can my job done without any extra cost.


> I suggest anyone interested in helping sponsoring an eCos startup 
> (indications from users about being willing to buy servicess from such a 
> startup would probably be the most valuabe item!) tell this to this 
> list, so that we can see it this could be a possible route to take.

As much as I would really *like* to agree with you, I don't see this 
happening. Part of eCos' fundamental appeal is that one doesn't have to 
purchase any services!

I hate to see Redhat withdrawing financial support for eCos, but I can see 
why. eCos clearly has achieved a critical mass in the embedded OS market. 
In my experience with Open Source software, that's adequate reason 
enough to keep "the project" alive. As users of eCos I think there are 
two main avenues left: 1) pressure the hardware manufacturers to provide 
an eCos Port, 2) contribute back to the project (with software patches).

Reason (1) works. At the early stages of my project I'm still evaluating
which processor that I'm going to use (although I'm almost certain it'll
be an Atmel ARM). The volumes for the project are significant - 100k's per
year. When I cited to an ARM competitor that one of the reasons I'm
looking at ARM is *because* of eCos (and the GCC tool chain), they made a 
(big) note of that and relayed that info "to the factory".

If these companies are lurking on the list by any chance, then my advice 
to them is that you ought to hire the eCos developers to port to your 
hardware/evaluation boards. The value of "free" software in this case is 
the hardware revenue that's generated. 

Reason (2) works as well. I know that I'll contribute back and I've seen
others doing so as well. This self-sustaining inertia has worked on many
Open Sourced projects - even the little ones that I happen to run. Unless
another embedded open source OS comes up that's significantly better than
eCos, I expect eCos to be active and around for a long time...


Scott


-- 
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://sources.redhat.com/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss

Re: [ECOS] Red Hat backs away from eCos?

[Bruce Smith]

Kjell Svensson wrote:
>I have also with satisfaction noted that some people from the former 
>Cygus/RedHat/eCos developer team is still talking to the list. I surely 
>hope most of these developers will be able to keep on working with 
>open-source eCos.

I agree.

It seems that Lineo has allowed a spinoff of its own RTOS from this article, 
so why not Red Hat?
http://theregister.co.uk/content/4/25696.html

I just find the silence from Red Hat and the developers deafening so 
thoughts and speculation begin to enter into my head. I would have expected 
the developers to announce their startup along with Red Hat's linuxdevices 
article, like Lineo and Quadros Systems did. Why are Red Hat and the 
developers not commenting on this, just to set the record straight? Or is it 
the usual "we do not comment on rumours"?



>I'm myself not sure whether VC-financing is the right thing for embedded 
>open-source projects - I have seen more than one well-working company 
>(maybe Cygnus is a good example?) that has lost much of its business 
>potential when VC:s have come in trying to boost revenues to unhealty 
>levels. And it usually don't seem to be any better if such a company 
>eventually goes off for an IPO...

Or gets bought by Red Hat :-)

Looking back through most of their aquisitions and their layoffs, there 
appears to be a corresponding releationship. While I would expect some 
layoffs, I would expect them to be administrative and not to the level of 
the developers that Red Hat has made.



>
>"Jim" (jyl087@netscape.net) suggested that chip manufacturers should form a 
>coalition group sponsoring further eCos development. While I believe this 
>is a beautiful idea, my experience with silicon manufacturers unfortunately 
>makes me pessimistic to whether this would be realistic.

I agree with you. Silicon vendors are being hard-pressed with the downturn 
in the embedded economy just as much as the rest of us. Even ARM did not 
perform as well as it should have. Pity Red Hat does not have the staying 
power to see this through, or maybe not ;-)



>
>Instead, I'd suggest that we who are today part of the eCos user community 
>join together, founding and sponsoring an eCos startup company who could 
>safely bring a truly open-source eCos further!
>If we move on fast, hopefully we could maybe even attract some of the 
>original eCos developers to this eCos startup before they will have to 
>switch over to other businesses

This is a great suggestion, but I do not think there is a rush. My guess 
from the silence is that Red Hat are have some kind of restraining order on 
the developers. Red Hat have a lot cash and a large legal staff, and large 
corporate bodies just tend to be like that in my experience. Whatever it is, 
I do not think the developers will be able to move fast given these 
restrictions, and news of what is happening to them will eventually leak out 
from Red Hat. I would wait until we start getting responses from these 
engineers either on this list or individually, and then start coordinating 
these efforts.

Tough break guys and hang in there. The community will still be here for you 
:-)



>While I doubt such a company would be able to produce revenue levels 
>interesting enough to a VC, I'm positive that it could safely provide a 
>sound financial ground for a smaller number of developers continuing the 
>eCos development in a truly open-source spirit. And with the help from 
>contributions from a more dedicated "sponsorship community", I believe the 
>speed of furter eCos development could even be improved.
>
>I suggest anyone interested in helping sponsoring an eCos startup 
>(indications from users about being willing to buy servicess from such a 
>startup would probably be the most valuabe item!) tell this to this list, 
>so that we can see it this could be a possible route to take.

You can count on my support and I would certainly recommend this startup to 
the companies I contract for. The eCos code these developers create is 
poetry IMHO, and this startup would certainly be able to contract for a lot 
less than what Red Hat charges. I was quoted $80-100k average for a port by 
their sales staff at ESCW around 2 years back, and did the work in 5 weeks. 
Not quite to the same standards though I suppose :-)



regards
bruce

_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com


-- 
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://sources.redhat.com/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss

Re: [ECOS] Red Hat backs away from eCos?

[Kjell Svensson]

Hi,

Bruce Smith wrote:
> Michael Kelly wrote:
> 
>> HI,
>>
>> For what it's worth, I say good riddance.  Red Hat never knew what
>> to do with eCOs or even GNU for that matter.  Now that the eCos
>> source is GPL'ed (with appropriate modifiers for embedded use), I
>> believe it will take off.  I intend to show my support by working with 
>> some of the developers to create board/eCos bundles for development
>> use.  I encourage all of the board vendors out there to do the same.
> 
> 
> I agree. And by developers I assume you mean those laid off?  I still 
> see activity from familiar names though no longer with Red Hat email 
> addresses :-) Who will maintain eCOs if Red Hat are not?
>
I have also with satisfaction noted that some people from the former 
Cygus/RedHat/eCos developer team is still talking to the list. I surely 
hope most of these developers will be able to keep on working with 
open-source eCos.
> 
> 
>>
>> And as for end users, support eCos by working with the developers
>> and funding the projects.  Maybe now they can take on reasonable
>> size jobs since they do not have to meet the inflated levels of revenue
>> Red Hat expected of each customer.
> 
> 
> There were rumours of an eCOs startup. Does anyone know what happened to 
> that? Did their VC fall through, or are they still looking for VC?
> 
I'm myself not sure whether VC-financing is the right thing for embedded 
open-source projects - I have seen more than one well-working company 
(maybe Cygnus is a good example?) that has lost much of its business 
potential when VC:s have come in trying to boost revenues to unhealty 
levels. And it usually don't seem to be any better if such a company 
eventually goes off for an IPO...

"Jim" (jyl087@netscape.net) suggested that chip manufacturers should 
form a coalition group sponsoring further eCos development. While I 
believe this is a beautiful idea, my experience with silicon 
manufacturers unfortunately makes me pessimistic to whether this would 
be realistic.

Instead, I'd suggest that we who are today part of the eCos user 
community join together, founding and sponsoring an eCos startup company 
who could safely bring a truly open-source eCos further!
If we move on fast, hopefully we could maybe even attract some of the 
original eCos developers to this eCos startup before they will have to 
switch over to other businesses
While I doubt such a company would be able to produce revenue levels 
interesting enough to a VC, I'm positive that it could safely provide a 
sound financial ground for a smaller number of developers continuing the 
eCos development in a truly open-source spirit. And with the help from 
contributions from a more dedicated "sponsorship community", I believe 
the speed of furter eCos development could even be improved.

I suggest anyone interested in helping sponsoring an eCos startup 
(indications from users about being willing to buy servicess from such a 
startup would probably be the most valuabe item!) tell this to this 
list, so that we can see it this could be a possible route to take.
> 
> 
>>
>> Anyway, I think an eCos free from Red Hat is good for the embedded
>> world and I do not believe it will die off.
> 
> 
> I agree. Red Hat were becoming the Microsoft of the Open Source world so 
> this can only be a good thing.
> 
> 
> 
> regards
> bruce
> 
> 
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.
> 
> 


Cheers, /Kjell
-- 
Kjell Svensson                 Embedded Technology Manager
Techtribe Solutions AB         Tel:  +46 (0)31 706 06 00
Flöjelbergsgatan 12            GSM:  +46 (0)70 270 76 66
SE-431 37  MÖLNDAL             Mail: kjell@techtribe.se
Sweden



-- 
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://sources.redhat.com/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss

RE: [ECOS] Red Hat backs away from eCos?

[Gustav Kälvesten]

> We're using eCos in a couple products, and we're wondering 
> where eCos is
> going to reside now that RH has abandonded it. Where is the "official"
> source for eCos going to be?

As I have understood it, the Open Source project will continue to be hosted
by RedHat. Just like many other projects at sources.redhat.com.
One interesting thing is that it seems RedHat will continue to use RedBoot
in their embedded Linux package.

- Gustav

-- 
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://sources.redhat.com/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss

Re: [ECOS] Red Hat backs away from eCos?

[jyl087]

It seems that the CPU vendors would have a vested interest in
keeping eCos alive. Have the eCos principals looked into sponsorship
by a company like Intel?  Or, better yet, maybe a coalition of vendors
such as Arm, Intel, MIPS, etc. It's clear that eCos and open source
tools lower the barrier to entry for embedded systems development,
which in the long run should drive chip sales.

Just a thought... (and probably not original)

/Jim

Tim Drury <tdrury@siliconmotorsports.com>(by way of Tim Drury <tdrury@siliconmotorsports.com>) wrote:

>Since I'm just starting a commercial project based on eCos, I'd just like
>to find out what happens from here?  Will development continue as it
>is or will the code base be moved to sourceforge or some place
>similar?
>
>I'm not worried that RedHat dropped it, but I'd just like to know if there
>is a definite path from here.
>
>And good luck to those that got laid off.
>
>-tim
>
>On Wednesday 19 June 2002 09:40 am, Bruce Smith wrote:
>> http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS5933176616.html
>>
>> According to this article it is true. And from what I can tell Red Hat have
>> no eCos programmers left to support existing customers either.
>>
>> Anyone from Red Hat care to comment?
>>
>> regards
>> bruce
>>
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Join the worldÂ’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
>> http://www.hotmail.com
>
>
>-- 
>Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://sources.redhat.com/fom/ecos
>and search the list archive: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss
>
>


__________________________________________________________________
Your favorite stores, helpful shopping tools and great gift ideas. Experience the convenience of buying online with Shop@Netscape! http://shopnow.netscape.com/

Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Mail account today at http://webmail.netscape.com/


-- 
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://sources.redhat.com/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss

Re: [ECOS] Red Hat backs away from eCos?

[Tim Drury]

Since I'm just starting a commercial project based on eCos, I'd just like
to find out what happens from here?  Will development continue as it
is or will the code base be moved to sourceforge or some place
similar?

I'm not worried that RedHat dropped it, but I'd just like to know if there
is a definite path from here.

And good luck to those that got laid off.

-tim

On Wednesday 19 June 2002 09:40 am, Bruce Smith wrote:
> http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS5933176616.html
>
> According to this article it is true. And from what I can tell Red Hat have
> no eCos programmers left to support existing customers either.
>
> Anyone from Red Hat care to comment?
>
> regards
> bruce
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Join the worldÂ’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
> http://www.hotmail.com


-- 
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://sources.redhat.com/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss

Re: [ECOS] Red Hat backs away from eCos?

[Bruce Smith]

Michael Kelly wrote:
>HI,
>
>For what it's worth, I say good riddance.  Red Hat never knew what
>to do with eCOs or even GNU for that matter.  Now that the eCos
>source is GPL'ed (with appropriate modifiers for embedded use), I
>believe it will take off.  I intend to show my support by working with some 
>of the developers to create board/eCos bundles for development
>use.  I encourage all of the board vendors out there to do the same.

I agree. And by developers I assume you mean those laid off?  I still see 
activity from familiar names though no longer with Red Hat email addresses 
:-) Who will maintain eCOs if Red Hat are not?



>
>And as for end users, support eCos by working with the developers
>and funding the projects.  Maybe now they can take on reasonable
>size jobs since they do not have to meet the inflated levels of revenue
>Red Hat expected of each customer.

There were rumours of an eCOs startup. Does anyone know what happened to 
that? Did their VC fall through, or are they still looking for VC?



>
>Anyway, I think an eCos free from Red Hat is good for the embedded
>world and I do not believe it will die off.

I agree. Red Hat were becoming the Microsoft of the Open Source world so 
this can only be a good thing.



regards
bruce



_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.


-- 
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://sources.redhat.com/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss