Re: gEDA-user: firmware and the GPL license

[al davis <ad151@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thursday 15 November 2007, John Griessen wrote:
> I think of how to partition things so a GPL chunk
> is on one processor, and talks to a non-GPL code processor or
> FPGA over a bus such as I2C bus or SPI bus.
>
> No compiling together then.  Analogous to reading an A2D
> converter... no viral influence on the ADC internal code.
>
> Is this the  correct GPL interpretation?

If they are packaged separately, so a user can choose either 
part, without the other.

RMS has claimed that GPL is not appropriate for hardware.  
Perhaps it is time for a new license in the spirit of GPL, 
specifically for hardware.  It might work to use GPL with a 
separate document defining some terms in the new scope, but it 
would look rather strange.

(..... "... object code is the physical manifestation of .....")


Suppose I want to distribute a "system" composed of 
two "modules"  ..  "A" and "B".    "A" is GPL.  "B" is 
proprietary.  It doesn't work.  However, I can sell you "A" 
and "B" separately and let you plug them together.


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