Several things in this update: the OpenPower Foundation released their
-EULA (which is really exciting); RISC-V Foundation opens access to
-*some* mailing lists (but doesn't tackle the important stuff); we had
+EULA (which is really exciting); we had
a last-minute decision to go to FOSDEM to meet NLNet (and meet lots
of nice people including someone from the EU Commission); we have new team
members helping out (and making really good progress).
First preliminary reading however, as Hugh kindly said privately to me,
there's really nothing controversial, here, and it actually looks really
-good and extremely well-designed.
-
-# RISC-V Mailing Lists
-
-In contrast to how OpenPower is being managed, since the last update,
-some of the RISC-V mailing lists have become open, though there was no
-announcement of this move and you can't get access to the prior
-archives. Still, I applaud the fact that they're finally making an
-effort.
-
-Unfortunately, critically important lists, such as the UNIX Platform
-Working Group, remain closed and secretive. This is actually quite
-damaging to RISC-V's reputation - it is incongruous with Libre ideals
-to tell u-boot and Linux kernel developers to sign a secret agreement
-and then join a closed mailing list, just for the privelege of
-contributing.
-
-*Editor's notes: Where is it documented that a secret agreement is
-required? Most people won't know what you're referring to. Is the
-agreement really not public at all? As for private mailing lists,
-please elaborate - do you mean none of the posts to the mailing list
-are public, or do you mean non-member posting is not allowed, or
-both?*
-
-They still have not responded (as is legally required under their
-trademark obligations) to any of the twenty to thirty very
-deliberately public, prominent, and reasonable in-good-faith requests
-for inclusion in the *innovation* (not just *use*) of RISC-V by Libre
-Businesses with "full transparency" as part of their core business
-objectives.
-
-*Editor's notes: Who is "they?" Please provide a link explaining
-trademark obligations and what is the trademark in question? Do you
-have links to some of the public requests being made? In what forum
-were the requests made and how do we know "they" received the
-requests? Is there a legal distinction between "innovation" and "use?"
-Overall, I think we need a lot more detail to make a compelling
-argument here.*
-
-I really don't want to be the only person informing people about how
-RISC-V is still "Fake Open Source" and how it's effectively cartelled
-(and is running afoul of anti-trust laws). If someone else can take over
-responsibility for this, I'd much prefer to keep the LibreSOC a positive,
-welcoming, and progressive community.
-
-*Editor's notes: I don't think it's worth having this paragraph unless
-there's a whole lot more backstory to support it. For example, what do
-you mean by cartel? Who is running the cartel and why? How is it
-running afoul of anti-trust laws and was that ever proven in a
-reputable legal jurisdiction? I'm not saying this story shouldn't be
-told, but only hinting at it does a disservice to everyone and will
-ultimately only serve to isolate you as a conspiracy theorist. PS: I
-see you do a better job at explaining all this a few paragraphs
-later. I think topic deserves its own update that you can point people
-to so they can easily grok the situation without having to wade
-through a bunch of other stuff. I also think it's worth engaging with
-some of the RISC-V folks directly before the update is posted to give
-them a chance to respond or offer corrections. This is an incredibly
-important topic and we need to make it airtight.*
+good and extremely well-designed. More on this on
+[Phoronix](https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=OpenPOWER-ISA-EULA-Draft)
### FOSDEM 2020
projects / crowdsupply.git / commitdiff