Notices by Tom Nardi (tomnardi@hackaday.social)

@amszmidt
I don't believe the situation is that simple.

Currently, libogc is under the zlib license. Which is GPL compatible, but not Copyleft. The inclusion of GPL code means libogc must be distributed under terms of the GPL, which puts more limits on the code than the some contributors may be comfortable with.

As there is no CLA, and zlib has no sublicense clause, the copyright holder (contributors) should be consulted if the project is going to become governed by a restrictive license.

Just published update on the ongoing libogc license situation.

Before it looked like they had just copied BSD code without attribution, which was a relatively easy fix. But now there's evidence that GPL code from Linux 2.6 found its way in there -- which is a whole other story.

https://hackaday.com/2025/05/14/rtems-statement-deepens-libogc-license-controversy/

#opensource #linux #software

@esden @lethalbit Yeah, I've been seeing a lot of this and it definitely has me worried.

Other than my normal distrust of closed source software, I have nothing against Discord. It's a easy way to socialize and chat.

But it's absolutely not a place you should be using to document projects.

I've taken apart a lot of stuff over the years, but I think this Epson printer front panel might be the only time I've ever seen reverse mounted SMD LEDs used like this.

Usually this is the kind of thing you'd see in a hacker conference badge, which is making me wonder who got the idea from who...