From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6678 invoked by alias); 10 Nov 2003 23:35:01 -0000 Mailing-List: contact ecos-discuss-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: ecos-discuss-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 6671 invoked from network); 10 Nov 2003 23:35:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO oola.is.kpn.be) (193.74.71.23) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 10 Nov 2003 23:35:00 -0000 Received: from (eudslpro-213-49-17-120.antwerp.kpn.be [213.49.17.120]) by oola.is.kpn.be with SMTP id hAANYcS22469; Tue, 11 Nov 2003 00:34:38 +0100 Message-Id: <200311102334.hAANYcS22469@oola.is.kpn.be> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: Chris Gray To: Gary Thomas , Suheel Hussain Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 23:35:00 -0000 Cc: ecos-discuss@sources.redhat.com References: <3FAED115.9010809@nc.rr.com> <1068422071.6577.123.camel@hermes> In-Reply-To: <1068422071.6577.123.camel@hermes> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [ECOS] Question regarding eCos license X-SW-Source: 2003-11/txt/msg00138.txt.bz2 On Monday 10 November 2003 00:54, Gary Thomas wrote: > On Sun, 2003-11-09 at 16:43, Suheel Hussain wrote: > > I am an embedded system consultant who evaluates OS for clients. > > Frequently I am asked to suggest real-time OS for client's project. In > > future I want to suggest eCos as an option to commercial OSs and Linux. > > > > I have few questions: > > 1. Do I have to give eCos source code to the client? Same for RedBoot? > > 2. Does client have to mention -- say in their product literature -- > > that their product is built on eCos? > > 3. If I tweak eCos to get better real-time response, etc. Am I required > > to post this change on discussion list, etc.? > > eCos is covered by a modified GPL license. Most of your questions are > answered in http://ecos.sourceware.org/license-overview.html > > In particular: > (1) - yes. The client has as much right to the eCos sources, including > any changes you make to the eCos codebase, as you do. > (2) - no. There is no "publicize" requirement. > (3) - yes. If you make changes to the eCos sources, including additions > which end up in the "main" eCos tree, those changes are covered by the GPL > and must be published. You would not have to actually send them to us, but > the effect is the same, they must be made public with no additional > constraints placed on them. IANAL, but as I understand it the sources only need to be made available to anyone who receives a binary, not to be made "public". Just how mauch difference this makes in practice will depend on the nature of the product. > Note: the exception clause that we have in the license *does* allow you to > add code/value when using eCos and not make that code public. In other > words, you can create an application which uses the eCos kernel, but the > application code itself is not automatically covered by the GPL. -- Chris Gray /k/ Embedded Java Solutions Embedded & Mobile Java, OSGi http://www.kiffer.be/k/ chris.gray@kiffer.be +32 477 599 703 -- Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://sources.redhat.com/fom/ecos and search the list archive: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss