dbc wrote:Why do open hardware projects use closed-source cripple-ware? At least two open source alternatives exist: gEDA and KiCAD. It is at the very least a rude slap in the face to the community to use Eagle for an open hardware project. IMHO it is also short-sighted and in some cases immoral.
tools don't matter. it will be nice to one day have lots of open source tools, but really - the tools do not matter.
dbc wrote:The open hardware license discussions have left me deeply disappointed in that the concept of releasing open hardware designs in open file formats gets very little emphasis. I acknowledge that 100% open tool chains are neither necessary nor practical for every project. But the community needs an open hardware license that requires that all design files be in open file formats for which at last one open source editing tool exists. I wouldn't expect every project to use such a license, but it needs to be available as a choice.
if we all waited for an open file format we wouldn't have OSHW, we need to build airplanes in the sky as they say. as you said " 100% open tool chains are neither necessary nor practical for every project" - OSHW is just getting started, open file formats are happening (cadsoft is doing one of them), the tools are getting better.
now that we have an OSHW definition someone can indeed make an OSHW license that required 100% OSS tools, will anyone want to use that license? not many, but some will. EMSL are the purest OSHW folks and eventually we'll see more (they use OSS all the way through, although some will debate about their computers and bios or something like that).
for now, the best way to see the change you seek is to do it.
cheers,
adafruit