On Wed, 19 Nov 2003, Oliver Kurth wrote: > Sigh. So if Atmel says these files are no longer GPL'ed, but are just > freely distributable, it could at least go to non-free? Yes. > Sounds ridiculous. (Law is too complicated to me, so I stick to > programming ;-) ) Thats part and parcel of the GPL... if the company doesn't include the prefered form for modification, no one else can distribute it. > Is there any way to get this into main, maybe regarding the fact that > this code is not run on the host but just on the device? I think > Atmel would be open to change the license, but I do not think they > will give the source to their holy (and btw buggy) firmware. Ugh. That's always annoying. Perhaps just a non-free package containing the firmware? (assuming we get permision to freely distribute it.) Is the firmware even necessary for the driver to work? One wonders why they don't just open up the source to the firmware drivers since they aren't planning on making any more updates to it. Don Armstrong -- "A one-question geek test. If you get the joke, you're a geek: Seen on a California license plate on a VW Beetle: 'FEATURE'..." -- Joshua D. Wachs - Natural Intelligence, Inc. http://www.donarmstrong.com http://www.anylevel.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature