D
David Nimmons
> Why wouldn't this be the intent? Why is it important for the system software to be "free" (as defined by the Free Software Foundation)
> but user programs need proprietary protections? What's the difference between someone developing a driver or other utility/enhancement to the Linux PLC (which would supposedly by implication be required to be licensed under GPL) and someone developing a control program to run a process? They both will supposedly make use of LinuxPLC APIs.<
I think he was talking about the possibility that GPL would require that the customer release the control program ( ladder logic, SFC, etc ) they develop for their application. I don't think this would be a very good selling point for many corporations.
> but user programs need proprietary protections? What's the difference between someone developing a driver or other utility/enhancement to the Linux PLC (which would supposedly by implication be required to be licensed under GPL) and someone developing a control program to run a process? They both will supposedly make use of LinuxPLC APIs.<
I think he was talking about the possibility that GPL would require that the customer release the control program ( ladder logic, SFC, etc ) they develop for their application. I don't think this would be a very good selling point for many corporations.