Because LICENSE.LATTICE Appendix C supersedes it (and the 'confidential' file itself points to that). Why do you deliberately ignore all evidence that points to an official and proper open-sourcing by Lattice in 2006, most importantly what they say and offer for download on their website? It seems you have your mind made up, that's fine. We will continue to use the open-source Mico32 core until Lattice makes it clear that we (and the rest of the world minus you) misunderstood them.
Then you will like to hear that Milkymist licenses every new line of code under the GPL, version 3. That's our default license... If you want to help replacing the Apache-style licensed Mico32 core with a copyleft (GPL) one, that would be great. As of right now, 75% of the HDL sources of the Milkymist SoC are already GPL licensed, the other 25% are LatticeMico32 open source...
Sure, anybody can edit wikipedia, but you are not anybody. I have never said that section 11 applies, you speak to yourself and don't read documents from beginning to end. Not a good start for someone studying a license imho. I don't think section 11 applies, I think it's Appendix C, which you seem to not have gotten to yet. I think the starting point is here, "LatticeMico32 Open, Free 32-Bit Soft Processor" http://www.latticesemi.com/products/intellectualproperty/ipcores/mico32/index.cfm
The genesis of the source files seems to go through the Mico System Builder, then mico32_72_linux.tar. I was wrong pointing you to sections 1-xx, it should be covered by Appendix C. You said you had to register to download the mico32 stuff, but I am just downloading it without any registration. I will dig up more for you:-)
We've done that like many others ("study the license carefully"), but you don't trust our results. That's your problem. The entire LATTICE.LICENSE applies to those files, not just section 11. Get your mind off of section 11, start reading at 1. Then 2. Then 3. and so on. If you don't want to do that, fine. Still your problem. Until you found out about Mico32 for the first time (today), the entire world knows since 2006 that Lattice has open-sourced the Mico32 core. Unfortunately they didn't pick a standard license (BSD/X11), but had to write their own. One reason for that is that they specifically wanted to include manufacturing rights in the 'open' part, otherwise people like you would come and say "they didn't specifically allow manufacturing, so it's no good for manufacturing". Moreover, they opened the Mico32 core because they know (like people from the Milkymist project know as well), that the main value comes from peripherals and SoC integration, not the core. There are a number of peripherals Lattice did not open source. The Milkymist project took the open Mico32 core, and added their own, Milkymist developed, open peripherals to it. If it were indeed true that the Milkymist project, together with the rest of the world, misunderstood the Lattice open source license since 2006, the Milkymist SoC would remove the (then) proprietary Mico32 core and switch to another core or write their own core. The Mico32 core files you pointed to (with the confusing proprietary/confidential header) make up a little less than 25% of the entire Milkymist SoC. We are very interested in those files being unquestionably open source, we fully respect copyrights and intellectual property, as any proper free software project would.
Thanks a lot for contacting Lattice, I hope they can help you. What you ask them is hastily written nonsense, but maybe they can calm you down somewhat:-) I really think you should slow down a bit, think more, act less. But that's up to you of course...
Who claimed that "section 11 of this license applies to those files"? Kristian Paul merely pointed to section 11. The entire license agreement applies to those files, specifically 1. 2. a. 2. b. 2. c. and so on. Maybe you read the entire license first and slow down a little. Section 11 is for 3rd party open source stuff Lattice included with their open source stuff. If you read 11.a., you should at least read 11.b and 11.c as well. Best is if you start at 1. And actually you should start on that latticesemi.com webpage you found yourself. Don't you think they want to tell you something there? What is it?
You did find something good still - the confusing "proprietary and confidential" remark at the top of some files that Lattice open-sourced under the license you haven't fully read yet. Let's see what Lattice says, you certainly wrote to them in the most disturbing style, so hopefully that wakes them up and you get a response... If the Slashdot comment section is really closed before you get an answer, please post to the milkymist development list.
Because Lattice said so. Just keep reading a bit more, think, and keep posting. Eventually you'll get there:-) Wikipedia must have gotten it wrong too then http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mico32
The entire video synthesizer runs on less than 5W. We didn't pick an fpga because we wanted to make an fpga computer. We picked an fpga because it allows us to make a spectacularly well performing and low power (!) video synthesizer. It can easily beat a multi-GHz Intel system.
All wrong:-) It has no metal shielding because it is so well designed. We absolutely went to an EMI test lab to be able to classify it under CE and FCC regulation. Under FCC regulation, Milkymist One is a non-intential radiator and thus does not require an FCC ID. It is enough that the manufacturer verifies that it is in fact meeting the requirements of a non-intentional radiator. The entire test lab report (31 pages) is online
-- disclosure: I manufacture Milkymist One --
If it's a dev kit, it's the most stunningly beautiful dev kit I know. Have you seen the pictures? http://en.qi-hardware.com/wiki/Milkymist_One_pictures
Technical superiority is very hard to judge, our goal is to make it super easy to use (basically just turn on), and then allow for anybody to dive deeper and deeper into it, all the way to the free hardware acceleration in the fpga. Tutorials needs to be written, videos made, etc. I will take some time.
But please accept for the 'dev kit' feedback: From day 1 of this project, we didn't want it to be a dev kit. All we care about is make very easy to use, beautiful, long lasting and fun products.
I bought three Clevo Notebooks last year without any OS preinstalled, then installed Debian Linux myself. The machines work fine. I also have several Sony C1 and a Sony U1, all with Debian Linux (my currently preferred distribution). However, every time, it's at least a few days of work and searching the web. Just a few days ago, I noticed this offer from Lycoris/Toshiba:
http://www.lycoris.com/press/portege.php
Sounds interesting. It's a nice Toshiba Portege 3500 with Linux preinstalled. I hope Lycoris has all/most drivers etc. as GPL, especially the modem, graphics card, wifi, touchpad. Any comments about this offer? Lycoris Desktop L/X?
Pointing to a site that says "$10,204 was paid last week for the following enhancements to the following projects..." would prove wrong the FUDers (Fudders?). --- Thanks, that's where I want to get to. In the initial post, you said it was so easy to find someone to do an extension for you. Well, I only have about 20 entries in my directory right now, and it's getting harder and harder to add 'quality' entries, names, etc.
For example, I want to add LDAP user authentication to ircd. Cannot find anybody. I want a binary to binary compiler addition for bochs, where can I join with others who want that to get the necessary funds to fund a whole engineering team? etc. etc.
And since all other places closed (cosource.com, sourcexchange) or do not want to go in this direction (sf.net), I decided to roll my own. I will see how far I get.
Uupps, if you would actually go to vim.org and search around the site for a while, you would find out that you can support Bram's Uganda project by donating to the ICCF Holland, or by buying books from Amazon.com using the links they give you.
And a directory can raise the awareness of such possibilities and put them together in one place, as well as provide a starting point for a Free Software development market like cosource.com was.
That's free as in speech, not free as in beer. If free speech were so worthless, why would the regular US citizen defend it so much? (And they are right!)
Open source developers not good at quality? I heartily disagree. In fact, the linux kernel hackers will identify 'company drivers' by the number of sleep() calls it uses to get the synchronization on SMP right.
That's just the reality for most proprietary developers.
Slashdot Mirror
check out milkymist.org for a free fpga-based cpu, with lots of great work towards free ic design, synthesis tools, dsp, etc.
Is everything alright with you? Hopefully Lattice can help you, I certainly cannot, sorry about that...
ACK. You need to register. Just tried in netsurf without cookies.
Because LICENSE.LATTICE Appendix C supersedes it (and the 'confidential' file itself points to that). Why do you deliberately ignore all evidence that points to an official and proper open-sourcing by Lattice in 2006, most importantly what they say and offer for download on their website? It seems you have your mind made up, that's fine. We will continue to use the open-source Mico32 core until Lattice makes it clear that we (and the rest of the world minus you) misunderstood them.
Then you will like to hear that Milkymist licenses every new line of code under the GPL, version 3. That's our default license... If you want to help replacing the Apache-style licensed Mico32 core with a copyleft (GPL) one, that would be great. As of right now, 75% of the HDL sources of the Milkymist SoC are already GPL licensed, the other 25% are LatticeMico32 open source...
Are you sure the documents and sources cannot be retrieved without registration? Did you try to click on the links? It downloads for me (and I'm not registered)...
http://www.latticesemi.com/dynamic/index.cfm?fuseaction=view_documents&sloc=01-01-08-11-48&source=sidebar
Can you try this one for example (random pick) http://www.latticesemi.com/dynamic/view_document.cfm?document_id=40936
Sure, anybody can edit wikipedia, but you are not anybody. I have never said that section 11 applies, you speak to yourself and don't read documents from beginning to end. Not a good start for someone studying a license imho. I don't think section 11 applies, I think it's Appendix C, which you seem to not have gotten to yet. I think the starting point is here, "LatticeMico32 Open, Free 32-Bit Soft Processor" http://www.latticesemi.com/products/intellectualproperty/ipcores/mico32/index.cfm
The genesis of the source files seems to go through the Mico System Builder, then mico32_72_linux.tar. I was wrong pointing you to sections 1-xx, it should be covered by Appendix C. You said you had to register to download the mico32 stuff, but I am just downloading it without any registration. I will dig up more for you :-)
We've done that like many others ("study the license carefully"), but you don't trust our results. That's your problem. The entire LATTICE.LICENSE applies to those files, not just section 11. Get your mind off of section 11, start reading at 1. Then 2. Then 3. and so on. If you don't want to do that, fine. Still your problem. Until you found out about Mico32 for the first time (today), the entire world knows since 2006 that Lattice has open-sourced the Mico32 core. Unfortunately they didn't pick a standard license (BSD/X11), but had to write their own. One reason for that is that they specifically wanted to include manufacturing rights in the 'open' part, otherwise people like you would come and say "they didn't specifically allow manufacturing, so it's no good for manufacturing". Moreover, they opened the Mico32 core because they know (like people from the Milkymist project know as well), that the main value comes from peripherals and SoC integration, not the core. There are a number of peripherals Lattice did not open source. The Milkymist project took the open Mico32 core, and added their own, Milkymist developed, open peripherals to it. If it were indeed true that the Milkymist project, together with the rest of the world, misunderstood the Lattice open source license since 2006, the Milkymist SoC would remove the (then) proprietary Mico32 core and switch to another core or write their own core. The Mico32 core files you pointed to (with the confusing proprietary/confidential header) make up a little less than 25% of the entire Milkymist SoC. We are very interested in those files being unquestionably open source, we fully respect copyrights and intellectual property, as any proper free software project would.
Thanks a lot for contacting Lattice, I hope they can help you. What you ask them is hastily written nonsense, but maybe they can calm you down somewhat :-) I really think you should slow down a bit, think more, act less. But that's up to you of course...
Who claimed that "section 11 of this license applies to those files"? Kristian Paul merely pointed to section 11. The entire license agreement applies to those files, specifically 1. 2. a. 2. b. 2. c. and so on. Maybe you read the entire license first and slow down a little. Section 11 is for 3rd party open source stuff Lattice included with their open source stuff. If you read 11.a., you should at least read 11.b and 11.c as well. Best is if you start at 1. And actually you should start on that latticesemi.com webpage you found yourself. Don't you think they want to tell you something there? What is it?
You did find something good still - the confusing "proprietary and confidential" remark at the top of some files that Lattice open-sourced under the license you haven't fully read yet. Let's see what Lattice says, you certainly wrote to them in the most disturbing style, so hopefully that wakes them up and you get a response... If the Slashdot comment section is really closed before you get an answer, please post to the milkymist development list.
Because Lattice said so. Just keep reading a bit more, think, and keep posting. Eventually you'll get there :-) Wikipedia must have gotten it wrong too then http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mico32
Thanks! (I work on Milkymist One) You can follow the project at http://twitter.com/milkymistvj
The entire video synthesizer runs on less than 5W. We didn't pick an fpga because we wanted to make an fpga computer. We picked an fpga because it allows us to make a spectacularly well performing and low power (!) video synthesizer. It can easily beat a multi-GHz Intel system.
All wrong :-) It has no metal shielding because it is so well designed. We absolutely went to an EMI test lab to be able to classify it under CE and FCC regulation. Under FCC regulation, Milkymist One is a non-intential radiator and thus does not require an FCC ID. It is enough that the manufacturer verifies that it is in fact meeting the requirements of a non-intentional radiator. The entire test lab report (31 pages) is online
http://en.qi-hardware.com/wiki/File:Reichl_milkymist_one_tests_11000301.pdf
-- disclosure: I manufacture Milkymist One -- If it's a dev kit, it's the most stunningly beautiful dev kit I know. Have you seen the pictures? http://en.qi-hardware.com/wiki/Milkymist_One_pictures Technical superiority is very hard to judge, our goal is to make it super easy to use (basically just turn on), and then allow for anybody to dive deeper and deeper into it, all the way to the free hardware acceleration in the fpga. Tutorials needs to be written, videos made, etc. I will take some time. But please accept for the 'dev kit' feedback: From day 1 of this project, we didn't want it to be a dev kit. All we care about is make very easy to use, beautiful, long lasting and fun products.
I bought three Clevo Notebooks last year without any OS preinstalled, then installed Debian Linux myself. The machines work fine. I also have several Sony C1 and a Sony U1, all with Debian Linux (my currently preferred distribution). However, every time, it's at least a few days of work and searching the web.
Just a few days ago, I noticed this offer from Lycoris/Toshiba:
http://www.lycoris.com/press/portege.php
Sounds interesting. It's a nice Toshiba Portege 3500 with Linux preinstalled. I hope Lycoris has all/most drivers etc. as GPL, especially the modem, graphics card, wifi, touchpad.
Any comments about this offer? Lycoris Desktop L/X?
Don't worry, I will add the Free Blender Project.
Pointing to a site that says "$10,204 was paid last week for the following enhancements to the following projects..." would prove wrong the FUDers (Fudders?).
---
Thanks, that's where I want to get to. In the initial post, you said it was so easy to find someone to do an extension for you. Well, I only have about 20 entries in my directory right now, and it's getting harder and harder to add 'quality' entries, names, etc.
For example, I want to add LDAP user authentication to ircd. Cannot find anybody. I want a binary to binary compiler addition for bochs, where can I join with others who want that to get the necessary funds to fund a whole engineering team?
etc. etc.
And since all other places closed (cosource.com, sourcexchange) or do not want to go in this direction (sf.net), I decided to roll my own. I will see how far I get.
Anyway, thanks for you thoughts and comments.
Uupps, if you would actually go to vim.org and search around the site for a while, you would find out that you can support Bram's Uganda project by donating to the ICCF Holland, or by buying books from Amazon.com using the links they give you.
And a directory can raise the awareness of such possibilities and put them together in one place, as well as provide a starting point for a Free Software development market like cosource.com was.
That's free as in speech, not free as in beer. If free speech were so worthless, why would the regular US citizen defend it so much? (And they are right!)
Open source developers not good at quality? I heartily disagree. In fact, the linux kernel hackers will identify 'company drivers' by the number of sleep() calls it uses to get the synchronization on SMP right.
That's just the reality for most proprietary developers.
Thanks for your help. In fact, that would have been my answer to wackybrit - I love sf.net, but they just don't let you do donations.
What I really want is to relaunch a Free Software marketplace. The Donation Directory is just the first step.
Also, try to go to donation pages of existing projects. Sometimes, they are really hard to find (I donate about once a month myself).
My directory just puts together some cool links. I just found the "Wine Party Fund" - did you know they accept beer donations for parties?