[riot-devel] Switch to BSD?

Emmanuel Baccelli Emmanuel.Baccelli at inria.fr
Fri Apr 10 10:59:16 CEST 2015


Hi everyone,
OK. In the mean time, based on the outcome of this discussion, I have
updated the "Why LGPL?" text in the FAQ (see
https://github.com/RIOT-OS/RIOT/wiki/FAQ). Comments/Suggestions/Mods are
welcome!
Best,
Emmanuel

On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 10:55 AM, Matthias Waehlisch <
m.waehlisch at fu-berlin.de> wrote:

> Hi,
>
>   same from FU side: we are also fine with keeping LGPL license.
>
>
>
> Cheers
>   matthias
>
>
> On Thu, 9 Apr 2015, Thomas C. Schmidt wrote:
>
> > Hi Emmanuel, all,
> >
> > forgot to reply on this: We at HAW are fine with keeping LGPL license.
> So no
> > conflict from our side.
> >
> > Best,
> >  Thomas
> >
> > On 22.03.2015 14:02, Emmanuel Baccelli wrote:
> > > Dear all,
> > >
> > > thanks for the input from everyone on this topic. It is a tough case to
> > > decide, based on our long and detailed exchanges on this subject.
> > >
> > > But it is probably time to conclude. At INRIA, we came up with the
> > > following observations:
> > >
> > > - there is no enthusiastic majority for a license change to BSD/MIT,
> > >
> > > - as solutions competing with RIOT are quasi-exclusively BSD/MIT,
> (L)GPL
> > > is a way to stand out positively.
> > >
> > > Concerning this last point, we observed that staying on the (L)GPL side
> > > strengthens our position comparing ourselves to Linux -- which has been
> > > one of our key non-technical arguments so far.
> > >
> > > Furthermore, studies such as [1] show that small companies and
> start-ups
> > > are going to determine IoT. More than bigger companies, such small
> > > structures need to spread development and maintenance costs for the
> > > kernel and all the software that is not their core business. Our
> > > analysis is that this is more compatible with (L)GPL than with BSD/MIT.
> > >
> > > We are of the opinion that, compared to BSD/MIT, (L)GPL will improve
> > > final user experience, security and privacy, by hindering device
> > > lock-down, favoring up-to-date, and field-updgradable code. We think
> > > this a more solid base to provide a consistent, compatible,
> > > secure-by-default standard system which developers can build upon to
> > > create trustworthy IoT applications.
> > >
> > > Last but not least, we think that (L)GPL is a better base than BSD/MIT
> > > to keep the community united in the mid and long run.
> > >
> > > For these reasons, even though we still believe a switch to BSD/MIT
> > > would facilitate RIOT's penetration rate initially, we want to continue
> > > releasing under LGPLv2.1.
> > >
> > > I also want to point out that even though this is basically "status
> > > quo", we think this discussion was far from useless, because it helped
> > > clarify where we stand, and for what.
> > >
> > >  From our point of view, the next steps are now to set up a non-profit
> > > legal entity for RIOT, and to put CLAs in place, allowing non-exclusive
> > > rights for the code to this legal structure.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > >
> > > Emmanuel
> > >
> > >
> > > [1] http://www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/2869521
> >
> >
>
> --
> Matthias Waehlisch
> .  Freie Universitaet Berlin, Inst. fuer Informatik, AG CST
> .  Takustr. 9, D-14195 Berlin, Germany
> .. mailto:waehlisch at ieee.org .. http://www.inf.fu-berlin.de/~waehl
> :. Also: http://inet.cpt.haw-hamburg.de .. http://www.link-lab.net
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list
> devel at riot-os.org
> https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.riot-os.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20150410/6ee5cc82/attachment.html>


More information about the devel mailing list