There is such thing as "freeware" Eagle [poll]

General project help for Adafruit customers

Moderators: adafruit_support_bill, adafruit

Please be positive and constructive with your questions and comments.

What do you think about this misleading practice?

Let's take some deep breaths and calm down
5
33%
It is perfectly normal and everything is still the same
2
13%
It is normal for new owner, but it's probably bad for Eagle
2
13%
It is unfair to hide the fact that Eagle can still be used as freeware
1
7%
It is unfair, but we will use Eagle anyway
0
No votes
It is end of Eagle, good bye old friend
0
No votes
Eagle was inappropriate for us even before that
3
20%
We don't care
2
13%
 
Total votes: 15

adafruit
 
Posts: 12151
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 4:21 pm

Re: There is such thing as "freeware" Eagle [poll]

Post by adafruit »

smindinvern wrote:I'm guessing that you're referring strictly to the use of Eagle in OSHW designs, but more generally speaking, I don't think it takes much to show that that statement is completely false. A design that's released in altium designer will do little to no good for hobbyists. So yes, it follows the OSHW license, but does it really follow the spirit of open source? Well, I think that's a matter of opinion.
we make and sell open source hardware for a living, we do not thing the tools matter. so far no one else who does OSHW thinks it matters either, that said - we pretty much all have the goal to move to OSS tools and file formats. we all seem to know it's not going to happen overnight.

if the designer only uses a certain tool but does everything reasonable for someone else to re-make the design, that's within the spirit of OSHW.

if you can provide an example of someone purposefully using an format that no one can use and no one can re-make based on what they released, and they're calling it OSHW please post it (we are not aware of a single example).

if a design is released in altium that's not ideal, but as long as it's possible to make / re-make, it really doesn't matter. eventually the maker will just save the design file to an open file format from their tool of choice. it's like caring about using windows to make OSHW. it doesn't matter, but ideally we'll all have a good assortment of OSS tools and file formats.

please review the OSHW definition, we all spent a lot of time talking about this :)

http://www.openhardwaresummit.org/oshw-definition-v1-0/

1. Documentation

The hardware must be released with documentation including design files, and must allow modification and distribution of the design files. Where documentation is not furnished with the physical product, there must be a well-publicized means of obtaining this documentation for no more than a reasonable reproduction cost, preferably downloading via the Internet without charge. The documentation must include design files in the preferred format for making changes, for example the native file format of a CAD program. Deliberately obfuscated design files are not allowed. Intermediate forms analogous to compiled computer code — such as printer-ready copper artwork from a CAD program — are not allowed as substitutes. The license may require that the design files are provided in fully-documented, open format(s).

smindinvern
 
Posts: 46
Joined: Sat Dec 25, 2010 9:19 pm

Re: There is such thing as "freeware" Eagle [poll]

Post by smindinvern »

adafruit wrote:if the designer only uses a certain tool but does everything reasonable for someone else to re-make the design, that's within the spirit of OSHW.
Well, sure, but that's not what I'm talking about :)
adafruit wrote: if you can provide an example of someone purposefully using an format that no one can use and no one can re-make based on what they released, and they're calling it OSHW please post it (we are not aware of a single example).
I don't have any examples, but that isn't exactly the point. The point is that I think the tools /do/ matter, even if only in a purely hypothetical way, in that something can be released as OSHW and still only be usable to those with access to extremely expensive software. Something can be completely accessible without being usable. I'm certainly glad that people don't do that, but they could. Or would that be in violation of the documentation clause that you posted?
adafruit wrote: if a design is released in altium that's not ideal, but as long as it's possible to make / re-make, it really doesn't matter. eventually the maker will just save the design file to an open file format from their tool of choice. it's like caring about using windows to make OSHW. it doesn't matter, but ideally we'll all have a good assortment of OSS tools and file formats.
Well, yes, if it's possible for anyone who wants to to re-make, then it's not much of an issue. Also, I wouldn't say that it's like caring about using windows or not. Using windows to design hardware doesn't affect the end user at all. Using proprietary formats very well could. Again, if the files are published in Altium or OrCad, etc. format, they're only usable by people with access to that software. And as for saving to an open file format, do either of those tools save to eagle's new XML format, gEDA's format, or KiCAD's format? If not, the only other open format that's left (that I know of) is Gerber, which I can't say I'd mind.

At the end of the day I guess it doesn't really matter since people aren't abusing the license; I just wanted to point out the fallacy in your statement. It makes a difference and affects the end user, whether it's important to you (or anyone else for that matter) or not.

adafruit
 
Posts: 12151
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 4:21 pm

Re: There is such thing as "freeware" Eagle [poll]

Post by adafruit »

smindinvern wrote:I don't have any examples, but that isn't exactly the point.
actually, without examples it's just a "what-if" a lot of folks get hung up on unlikely scenarios we like to point out there usually zero examples of something like this.

this is always a good discussion, we've seen this movie a few times so we've thought a lot about this :)
smindinvern wrote: The point is that I think the tools /do/ matter, even if only in a purely hypothetical way, in that something can be released as OSHW and still only be usable to those with access to extremely expensive software. Something can be completely accessible without being usable. I'm certainly glad that people don't do that, but they could. Or would that be in violation of the documentation clause that you posted?
tools do not matter, just like it doesn't matter what OS you use to make OSS. what's ideal vs what can happen now and change in the future are different things. if you release a fully documented OSHW project and the design file is also released but relies on pricey software, that's not ideal - but (read the the def.) as long as it's in the preferred format for making changes it's ok, again - it's more about what "can you live with".

keep in mind we want to ultimately have a full OSS toolchain, OS, everything. we just know that is not going to happen overnight, so why get bogged down and wait? we'd rather continue to release OSHW and work with the design tool makers to make OSS tools and OS file formats.
smindinvern wrote:Also, I wouldn't say that it's like caring about using windows or not. Using windows to design hardware doesn't affect the end user at all. Using proprietary formats very well could. Again, if the files are published in Altium or OrCad, etc. format, they're only usable by people with access to that software.
so far no one has had a problem with not being to re-make hard because of design file issues. "could" it be an issue, maybe - but so far, never. besides if someone was being a jerk about something someone would just open the file and export it or re-make it. but again, it's never happened. if you're doing OSHW you're already saying you want to make it easier for others to re-make your hardware.

the biggest problem is actually tutorials and documentation, not design files.
smindinvern wrote:And as for saving to an open file format, do either of those tools save to eagle's new XML format, gEDA's format, or KiCAD's format? If not, the only other open format that's left (that I know of) is Gerber, which I can't say I'd mind.
there isn't a new eagle XML format *yet* we (and others) worked with them to convince them (it was easy, they were going to do it) - it will be part of the next version. after that we expect everyone to write to open file formats and then this will not matter.
smindinvern wrote:At the end of the day I guess it doesn't really matter since people aren't abusing the license; I just wanted to point out the fallacy in your statement. It makes a difference and affects the end user, whether it's important to you (or anyone else for that matter) or not.
there isn't any fallacy in our statement, tools do not matter, really. they didn't matter for the history of OSHW, they soon will never, ever really really matter as we all move towards open file formats. don't get stuck on this, really - it doesn't matter :)

thanks,
adafruit

User avatar
westfw
 
Posts: 2008
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 1:01 pm

Re: There is such thing as "freeware" Eagle [poll]

Post by westfw »

A design that's released in altium designer will do little to no good for hobbyists.
I disagree. It's still "good for hobbyists" even if all you get is printed schematics. And "good for hobbyists" isn't really a requirement of Open Source, anyway. Even in the software domain, the number of people who can glean understanding by looking at the GIMP sources is much smaller than the user base, for example. "Open Source" means a lot more than "I get neat stuff for free."

Consider BeagleBoard. Released as OrCAD design files. Not that it matters much, since the technology used (BGA packages, etc) pretty much precludes me from making my own board even if I had OrCAD. Is it a significant investment for another vendor to sell a modified BeagleBoard? Yes. Is it still good that this is open source? Hell yes!

adafruit
 
Posts: 12151
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 4:21 pm

Re: There is such thing as "freeware" Eagle [poll]

Post by adafruit »

westfw wrote:I disagree. It's still "good for hobbyists" even if all you get is printed schematics. And "good for hobbyists" isn't really a requirement of Open Source, anyway. Even in the software domain, the number of people who can glean understanding by looking at the GIMP sources is much smaller than the user base, for example. "Open Source" means a lot more than "I get neat stuff for free."

Consider BeagleBoard. Released as OrCAD design files. Not that it matters much, since the technology used (BGA packages, etc) pretty much precludes me from making my own board even if I had OrCAD. Is it a significant investment for another vendor to sell a modified BeagleBoard? Yes. Is it still good that this is open source? Hell yes!
+1 we agree with everything westfw said :)

User avatar
opossum
 
Posts: 636
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 12:42 am

Re: There is such thing as "freeware" Eagle [poll]

Post by opossum »

Code: Select all

++westfw;

Shaos
 
Posts: 76
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 9:41 pm

Re: There is such thing as "freeware" Eagle [poll]

Post by Shaos »

adafruit wrote:...it's like caring about using windows to make OSHW. it doesn't matter
For example it matters for me, because I DON'T have Windows on my computers AT ALL!
So I can run only software that exists for Linux Intel (preferred) or at least Mac OS X 10.4 PPC
From this point of view Eagle is a good choice (I have standard license for both platforms)

P.S. Choice of tools doesn't matter for most of the "hobbyist-friendly" open hardware projects if you are "professional" or "advanced hobbyist", because for them it is possible to replicate that hardware relatively quickly (a few hours) in ANY software just based on schematics image, but "average hobbyist" will not be able to do that...

Agent24
 
Posts: 307
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 6:48 am

Re: There is such thing as "freeware" Eagle [poll]

Post by Agent24 »

Shaos wrote:
adafruit wrote:P.S. Choice of tools doesn't matter for most of the "hobbyist-friendly" open hardware projects if you are "professional" or "advanced hobbyist", because for them it is possible to replicate that hardware relatively quickly (a few hours) in ANY software just based on schematics
But still a pain in the ass.. :lol: also that assumes the schematic is available as something like PNG, and not in a proprietary format where you need a commercial program to open it anyway.

Shaos
 
Posts: 76
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 9:41 pm

Re: There is such thing as "freeware" Eagle [poll]

Post by Shaos »

If schematic is not available as something like PNG or PDF then it is NOT open source :)

Shaos
 
Posts: 76
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 9:41 pm

Re: There is such thing as "freeware" Eagle [poll]

Post by Shaos »

OK, 1000 views, 53 replies (4 pages) and 14 votes:
1. 5 neutral
2. 1 positive
3. 2 negative
4. 1 negative
5. 0 negative
6. 0 negative
7. 3 negative
8. 2 neutral
So now we have 1 positive response (7%), 7 neutral (50%) and 6 negative (43%)

User avatar
keith_ee
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2011 4:05 am

Re: There is such thing as "freeware" Eagle [poll]

Post by keith_ee »

Hello,

Sorry if this post is not in the right category but since the discussion is about OSS, Eagle, gEDA, etc. I thought I would ask.

Doesn't Eagle output XML files? To make it more OSS friendly can Eagle also output schematics as ascii files? Is there a cool open source conversion program available?

Thanks,
Keith

Locked
Please be positive and constructive with your questions and comments.

Return to “General Project help”