From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21025 invoked by alias); 7 Apr 2008 13:08:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 21010 invoked by uid 22791); 7 Apr 2008 13:08:36 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail168c2.megamailservers.com (HELO mail168c2.megamailservers.com) (69.49.111.68) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Mon, 07 Apr 2008 13:08:17 +0000 X-Authenticated-User: jiri.gaisler.com Received: from [192.168.0.23] (c-d2c9e253.93-16-64736c12.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se [83.226.201.210]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail168c2.megamailservers.com (8.13.6.20060614/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m37D8Asg014776; Mon, 7 Apr 2008 09:08:13 -0400 Message-Id: <200804071308.m37D8Asg014776@mail168c2.megamailservers.com> Message-ID: <47FA1CE4.8090708@gaisler.com> Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2008 13:17:00 -0000 From: Jiri Gaisler User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.1.12) Gecko/20080201 SeaMonkey/1.1.8 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alex Schuilenburg CC: ecos-discuss@ecos.sourceware.org References: <20080403112347.68e481c9@kingfisher.sec.intern.logix-tt.com> <200804030937.m339bj00013603@mail168c2.megamailservers.com> <200804032050.20913.neundorf@kde.org> <200804032228.m33MSkCg027848@mail168c2.megamailservers.com> <20080404104457.35553e0a@kingfisher.sec.intern.logix-tt.com> <200804040912.m349CrYq028389@mail176c2.megamailservers.com> <20080404114231.7efcf59a@kingfisher.sec.intern.logix-tt.com> <47F5FC4A.2080401@gaisler.com> <20080404145330.GM7929@lunn.ch> <200804041510.m34FAdfE025938@mail175c2.megamailservers.com> <47F64F89.9080809@ecoscentric.com> <200804041650.m34Goakc019397@mail175c2.megamailservers.com> <47F9FDE9.5000707@ecoscentric.com> In-Reply-To: <47F9FDE9.5000707@ecoscentric.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact ecos-discuss-help@ecos.sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: ecos-discuss-owner@ecos.sourceware.org Subject: Re: [ECOS] Are copyright assignments detrimental to eCos? X-SW-Source: 2008-04/txt/msg00104.txt.bz2 Alex Schuilenburg wrote: > Anyway, nobody is trying to force you to contribute here. I am just > trying to show you some of the benefits contributions can make to your > users, the community as well as yourself. Your changes and improvements > are yours to do with as you see fit, subject to licensing of course ;-) I don't see the benefit to our users if there are two different versions of our contribution, one in the anoncvs and one in the Pro. In such case, I prefer to have our own fork where we have control over what goes into our code modules and where we are able to support it. The development model for kernels like RTEMS and linux seems more reliable to me. There is only one code base and all testing, validation and bug reporting is done on the same set of code. I believe this was also the case for eCos as long as Cygnus maintained the code. Going back to this model could in fact benefit eCos Pro, since it would create a much larger user base for the Pro code, potentially finding more bugs and provide more improvements. Just my 2 cents anyhow ... Jiri. -- Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss