Quick note:
There is the Open Source Hardware Association which maintains the
definition of Open Source Hardware here which enshrines the four
freedoms for free software into hardware designs:
https://www.oshwa.org/definition/
Yes, I fully recognize and acknowledge that they use the term "open
source" instead of "free" as in freedom, and this is a crucial
distinction. But just wanted to let everyone know it exists, so that if
someone wants to work on free hardware, they are aware of what has
already been done so that we don't have to re-invent any wheels.
There is also the recently-published standard DIN SPEC 3105:
https://wiki.opensourceecology.org/wiki/DIN_SPEC_3105
Which defines more details for free hardware designs, including a
recommended method of certifying them.
There are also the Open Know-How (OKH) and OKH-EC standards on best
practices for documenting and publishing free hardware designs:
https://www.internetofproduction.org/open-know-how
https://okh-ec.openknowhow.org
I know some of the people behind these initiatives, in fact I think some
of them consulted RMS when coming up with their definitions? Anyway, if
there's serious interest in this from the free software community, I can
help get you in touch with those people.
On 1/22/22 07:25, Jacob Hrbek wrote:
> I don't think the FSf has the skills or the staff resources to praise
hardware with free designs. But I am not in charge of that now, so I
have no more to say about it. -- RMS
From my experience i don't feel like this process requires
qualification and resources that FSF doesn't have as i think that the
process should be:
Does it provide gerber (file that contains the PCB design and is used
for manufacturing), schematics (file providing wiring of the components)
and models for the chasis (e.g. STL files to fabricate the chasis on
e.g. 3D printer) under GPLv3-complying license?
- Yes -> Certify it as Free Hardware Design
- No -> Don't certify it
Alternatively worst case scenario that takes the least amount of
resources that i can think of would be to rename "Respects your Freedom"
to "Respects Software Freedom" so that it's not taken as FSF endorsing
proprietary hardware development.
I also think that h-node is a good website that provides
community-maintained rating for various hardware, so just adding either
a new rating (currently the A-Platinum is highest and used for non-free
hardware designs) or new database value for hardware freedom would be
optimal in my opinion.
> I will look at what the RepRap developers said, and what those other
groups said. (They never told me, damn it!) I suspect they are looking
for something that copyright simply cannot do. -- RMS
Thanks for looking into it I appreciate it.
On 1/22/22 05:41, Richard Stallman wrote:
I don't think the FSf has the skills or the staff resources to praise
hardware with free designs. But I am not in charge of that now,
so I have no more to say about it.
_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
publickey - kreyren@rixotstudio.cz - 1677db82.asc