Re: gEDA-user: Draft Licence for Open Source Hardware published (OT)

[timecop <timecop@xxxxxxxxx>]

No, I'm just using whatever tool gets the job done while staying out of the way.
I don't actually use Protel, but I did purchase the EDA suite that I'm using.



On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 9:18 PM, Armin Faltl <armin.faltl@xxxxxx> wrote:
> Man, what are you doing here?
> Read up and steal ideas to incorporate in proprietary tools?
> Try snatch bits of wisdome to patent denying prior art?
>
> timecop wrote:
>>>
>>> I think that the proper place to resolve this issue is in the actual
>>> *licenses,* which as with OSS may vary from permissive to restrictive.  I'd
>>> like to see the evolution of at least one OSHW license where a requirement
>>> is that the design files for the project-- and its derivative works --need
>>> to be in open, documented formats.
>>>
>>
>> Keep dreaming, bro.
>> Maybe when gEDA reaches 1/10th the functionality/usability of say Protel.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> geda-user mailing list
>> geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
>>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> geda-user mailing list
> geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
>


_______________________________________________
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user