* Re: [ECOS] Re: RE : [ECOS] Licence consideratios.
[not found] ` <20040316153617.GC31390@lunn.ch>
@ 2004-03-18 15:08 ` Jonathan Larmour
2004-03-18 15:09 ` Jonathan Larmour
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Jonathan Larmour @ 2004-03-18 15:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Lunn; +Cc: eCos Maintainers
This is the license in question. http://www.rtems.com/license/LICENSE
IANAL of course, but I believe it is incompatible: "[...] linking other
files with RTEMS objects to produce an executable application, does not
by itself cause the resulting executable application to be covered
by the GNU General Public License."
This will be linked with non-RTEMS objects. Therefore the full GPL would
apply, therefore it is not acceptable, sorry. We can put it up in our
contributions section, but not include it in the main source base.
Jifl
Andrew Lunn wrote:
>>In fact, licence terms were not included into the files I downloaded.
>>I have contacted the original contributor that said to me the package
>>was released under "RTEMs licence".
>>Regarding the name of four licences, I assumed it was "Primary licence".
>>
>>Then I have included RTEMs "Primary licence" terms into files and
>>submited those files to the original contributor for agreement.
>>He gave me this agreement.
>>
>>But I can't switch to eCos licence as, I think, all contributors should
>>give their agreement.
>
>
> True.
>
>
>>Is this a problem to include files into eCos distribution?
>
>
> Now we know which license we are talking about, we can read it and see
> if its compatible.
>
> Andrew
>
--
eCosCentric http://www.eCosCentric.com/ The eCos and RedBoot experts
>>>>> Visit us in booth 2527 at the Embedded Systems Conference 2004 <<<<<
March 30 - April 1, San Francisco http://www.esconline.com/electronicaUSA/
--["No sense being pessimistic, it wouldn't work anyway"]-- Opinions==mine
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [ECOS] Re: RE : [ECOS] Licence consideratios.
2004-03-18 15:08 ` [ECOS] Re: RE : [ECOS] Licence consideratios Jonathan Larmour
@ 2004-03-18 15:09 ` Jonathan Larmour
2004-03-19 1:34 ` Jonathan Larmour
2004-03-19 1:45 ` Jonathan Larmour
2 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Jonathan Larmour @ 2004-03-18 15:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Lunn; +Cc: eCos Maintainers
Jonathan Larmour wrote:
> This is the license in question. http://www.rtems.com/license/LICENSE
>
> IANAL of course, but I believe it is incompatible: "[...] linking other
> files with RTEMS objects to produce an executable application, does not
> by itself cause the resulting executable application to be covered
> by the GNU General Public License."
>
> This will be linked with non-RTEMS objects. Therefore the full GPL would
> apply, therefore it is not acceptable, sorry. We can put it up in our
> contributions section, but not include it in the main source base.
Sorry, I didn't finish like intended.... I just want to check, do people
agree with my interpretation?
Jifl
> Andrew Lunn wrote:
>
>>> In fact, licence terms were not included into the files I downloaded.
>>> I have contacted the original contributor that said to me the package
>>> was released under "RTEMs licence".
>>> Regarding the name of four licences, I assumed it was "Primary licence".
>>>
>>> Then I have included RTEMs "Primary licence" terms into files and
>>> submited those files to the original contributor for agreement.
>>> He gave me this agreement.
>>>
>>> But I can't switch to eCos licence as, I think, all contributors should
>>> give their agreement.
>>
>>
>>
>> True.
>>
>>> Is this a problem to include files into eCos distribution?
>>
>>
>>
>> Now we know which license we are talking about, we can read it and see
>> if its compatible.
>> Andrew
>>
>
>
--
eCosCentric http://www.eCosCentric.com/ The eCos and RedBoot experts
>>>>> Visit us in booth 2527 at the Embedded Systems Conference 2004 <<<<<
March 30 - April 1, San Francisco http://www.esconline.com/electronicaUSA/
--["No sense being pessimistic, it wouldn't work anyway"]-- Opinions==mine
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [ECOS] Re: RE : [ECOS] Licence consideratios.
2004-03-18 15:08 ` [ECOS] Re: RE : [ECOS] Licence consideratios Jonathan Larmour
2004-03-18 15:09 ` Jonathan Larmour
@ 2004-03-19 1:34 ` Jonathan Larmour
2004-03-19 1:45 ` Jonathan Larmour
2 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Jonathan Larmour @ 2004-03-19 1:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Lunn; +Cc: eCos Maintainers
Jonathan Larmour wrote:
> This is the license in question. http://www.rtems.com/license/LICENSE
>
> IANAL of course, but I believe it is incompatible:
Just saying "Incompatible" was imprecise. I meant incompatible with
contributing back. It's usable but only under the full GPL.
>"[...] linking other
> files with RTEMS objects to produce an executable application, does not
> by itself cause the resulting executable application to be covered
> by the GNU General Public License."
>
> This will be linked with non-RTEMS objects. Therefore the full GPL would
> apply, therefore it is not acceptable, sorry. We can put it up in our
> contributions section, but not include it in the main source base.
No comments so I'll reply on ecos-discuss.
Jifl
--
eCosCentric http://www.eCosCentric.com/ The eCos and RedBoot experts
>>>>> Visit us in booth 2527 at the Embedded Systems Conference 2004 <<<<<
March 30 - April 1, San Francisco http://www.esconline.com/electronicaUSA/
--["No sense being pessimistic, it wouldn't work anyway"]-- Opinions==mine
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [ECOS] Re: RE : [ECOS] Licence consideratios.
2004-03-18 15:08 ` [ECOS] Re: RE : [ECOS] Licence consideratios Jonathan Larmour
2004-03-18 15:09 ` Jonathan Larmour
2004-03-19 1:34 ` Jonathan Larmour
@ 2004-03-19 1:45 ` Jonathan Larmour
2 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Jonathan Larmour @ 2004-03-19 1:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Lunn; +Cc: eCos Maintainers
Jonathan Larmour wrote:
> This is the license in question. http://www.rtems.com/license/LICENSE
>
> IANAL of course, but I believe it is incompatible: "[...] linking other
> files with RTEMS objects to produce an executable application, does not
> by itself cause the resulting executable application to be covered
> by the GNU General Public License."
>
> This will be linked with non-RTEMS objects. Therefore the full GPL would
> apply, therefore it is not acceptable, sorry. We can put it up in our
> contributions section, but not include it in the main source base.
Okay, I'm being noisy here, but now on rereading/rethinking, I think I'm
wrong on the above reasoning.
However there is still an issue.... right now we allow any works based on
eCos to be distributed with the GPL exception clause. This permits people
to distribute unlinked or partially linked objects, e.g. libtarget.a etc.
with no further restrictions than if they distributed other binaries.
The RTEMS license only permits executable applications to be distributed
with the exception, so if someone distributes libtarget.a, then it becomes
fully GPL'd, and so their whole application would become GPL'd. This is an
undesirable new restriction.
So yes there is still a problem and I'll send that to ecos-discuss.
Jifl
--
eCosCentric http://www.eCosCentric.com/ The eCos and RedBoot experts
>>>>> Visit us in booth 2527 at the Embedded Systems Conference 2004 <<<<<
March 30 - April 1, San Francisco http://www.esconline.com/electronicaUSA/
--["No sense being pessimistic, it wouldn't work anyway"]-- Opinions==mine
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2004-03-19 1:45 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <20040316145729.GB31390@lunn.ch>
[not found] ` <000301c40b6b$b0d064b0$7407a8c0@figuier>
[not found] ` <20040316153617.GC31390@lunn.ch>
2004-03-18 15:08 ` [ECOS] Re: RE : [ECOS] Licence consideratios Jonathan Larmour
2004-03-18 15:09 ` Jonathan Larmour
2004-03-19 1:34 ` Jonathan Larmour
2004-03-19 1:45 ` Jonathan Larmour
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).