[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: firmware status for eagle-usb-*

> In article <2QQPq-57R-1@gated-at.bofh.it> you wrote:
> Loïc, I suggest you read the whole debian-legal thread named "non-free
> firmware: driver in main or contrib?", because it answers many of the
> points you raised.
> I will summarize the points relevant to the eagle-usb-* packages:

thanks Marco, as I did not take this time to summarize in my previous
answer :

> - distribution of firmwares with no source code available in debian/main
>   has been forbidden by the second-last general resolution, but the last
> general resolution removed this restriction just for sarge (as long as
> the license allows distribution)
> - the GPL issue is probably a non-issue: if the copyright owner (Sagem)

Analog Digital, Inc. is the copyright holder for firmware and dsp_code
We are currently working with them, the distribution issue has been
raised, the licence issue is to come as the answer "all the files in
adi.zip file can be distributed" is only suficient for distribution.
That's one of the reasons why I began :
Maybe GPL (with sourcecode) can be obtained, at least for older firmware.
For latest firmware I've got to ask (with suficient reasons, it may be
possible, or at least a licence in the list given by Nathanael).

>   stated that what the binary blobs they provide is source, I think that
> the ftpmasters team will accept the package (the ftpmasters decide
> what goes in debian, not debian-legal...)
> - notwithstanding the disagreement of a few people here, even if
>   post-sarge eagle-usb-data will have to be moved to non-free, there is
> nothing in our policy which prevents to downgrade the hard dependency
> to a suggestion, to be able to keep shipping the free driver in main
> The effect of this is that, as long as the ftpmasters team is happy with
> the license clarification from Sagem, you can keep eagle-usb-data too in
> main for sarge.
>> I'm really sorry I re-started a long-discussed troll again, and I'm
>> sad Debian won't provide support for a lot of hardware in a close
>> future.
> Do not mistake the opinion of a few vocal debian-legal users with the
> one of all developers. Many other developers share your concern and will
> fight to not let this happen.
> Please join debian-legal and keep defending the freeness of your
> package.

Comments are welcome to help identify possible impacts of this choice of
licence in the near term and the long term :
Short terms requirements are validated (#ST) by Analog and Sagem, longer
terms requiremens are to be discussed soon (#LT).
My concerns are indeed for availability on CD for the end-user, an
acceptable way to install, clear licencing that is accepted by all.

Ben'. aka baud123

Reply to: