4 ms·
> A permissive open-source license. What specific license will you be releasing under? Is that still TBD? Also, who is putting up the money for dev time and f
by roymurdock 11y ago
> A permissive open-source license.
What specific license will you be releasing under? Is that still TBD?
Also, who is putting up the money for dev time and fabrication? Partners?
Exciting stuff. Thanks for sharing!
- asb 11y agoChanges to existing projects (e.g. Berkeley's Rocket RISC-V design) is released under the upstream project's license. We're interested in using an Apache-derived license for new hardware codebases due to the additional patent clauses. We have received backing from a private individual which has got us going, and some additional donations from some of our project partners.
- jacques_chester 11y agoCompanies paying into Foundations which own the IP under an Apache license is becoming a relatively well-tested pattern these days. The Linux Foundation provides "Foundation as a Service" to several of these. I work for Pivotal, so I'm most familiar with the Cloud Foundry Foundation, which is administered by the Linux Foundation on behalf of members. From what I can see, it's a smooth way to offload the administrative stuff to specialists while retaining the core openness.