[gta02-core] RFC: Open Source Hardware - Disclosure Requisites
wolfgang at qi-hardware.com
Fri Jul 24 08:26:44 CEST 2009
'Open Design Hardware' is nice!
I like the clarity of Copyleft Hardware. The term is not meant to be tied to
opening existing designs, if that's what you get from our texts maybe we should
reword a bit.
Qi starts with existing designs, and let's their partners know we are going to
open it up, get it all into a copyleft state. Then make changes only as many
and as fast as we can manage without undermining HW quality.
But that's an internal operational restriction at Qi, has nothing to do with
the clarity of the term Copyleft Hardware, meaning that all files that make
up the hardware design are under copyleft licenses.
On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 01:12:40PM -0300, Werner Almesberger wrote:
> Dave Ball wrote:
> > I think this is great, and very needed!
> Thanks !
> > I'm torn between "open
> > source hardware" and "open hardware".
> Yeah, I'm a bit uncertain what name to introduce for this. The
> folks at qi-hardware use "Copyleft Hardware", but they tie it to
> opening existing designs, which isn't what we're after in the
> long run. (And with GTA02 already being partially open, even the
> short run is different.)
> I put a bias towards "viral" schemes, which in the analogy with
> "Open Source Software" isn't required. So I would plead guilty of
> a lie of omission ;-)
> I also included the open design process, which isn't strictly a
> requirement of Open Source.
> So it would be good to find an expression that extends the focus
> a bit beyond just the license. I actually like "Open Design
> Hardware". From that, it follows naturally that the license would
> be Open as well, and it explains the need to be able to talk about
> the design before it's done.
> In fact, "design" could refer to the process as well as the result.
> Sometimes, ambiguities are good :-)
> - Werner
> gta02-core mailing list
> gta02-core at lists.openmoko.org
More information about the gta02-core