Edit: I will point out the obvious - you are breaking the license doing that.
The software you have already shipped with the devices is the source code you must supply to anyone who rightfully requests it.
Not some modified version of it ... so you already have the code (unless the devices have been shipped but not working?)
This is not correct.They have NO obligation to give
you the source code. They have an obligation to give the source code (indeed, the actual code and not a 'cleaned up' version) to parties that they gave the binaries to, if they request it. That's it. Go read the license.
Fool - read what I said - I worded it VERY SPECIFICALLY Edit:
IT IS CORRECTThe words are "you must supply to anyone who
rightfully requests it."
Those who rightfully request it will be those who have the right to request it - those who get the hardware and software - others cannot rightfully request it.
Yet again gmaxwell you have misread what I wrote - but in this case it is VERY specific what I wrote.
Read it again - it is not what you are implying I wrote.
There is no requirement yet for them to give it to me.
Meanwhile ...
They have however stated that they would, here in this thread, twice, and on their web site.
I will also point out that they promote themselves as open source even on their own web site.
I do find the fact that they would promote that yet hide the source, that is already complete according to them, quite hypocritical.
However, as I also stated, there is one possibility I can think of that would cover the fact that they MUST already have the source for the device and not show it ... and that is that they indeed DO NOT have the source for the device and are shipping devices that don't in fact work properly yet.
Seriously there is nothing to 'clean up'.
If there was something to 'clean up' then they have shipped devices with this non-'cleaned up' code used to generate the binaries.
I'll be blunt, I find this whole 'we will not demonstrate a device like we promised to' rather suspect.
Without doubt they can piss people off and hide details as much as they like, since they have already sold all 300 devices in this batch - but I don't see how pissing off many people can possibly be good for them ... unless they have no choice but to do it ...
When someone does finally get a device ... I will be interested indeed to see firstly how long that takes for them to get it, and secondly their response to anyone who rightfully can request the source.
To put it in the simplest terms, either there is a package on it's way to Jeff Garzik and when he gets it everyone will know what they want to know ... or there is something suspect going on.
The issue IMO will be how long until that package gets to Jeff Garzik ... and then how long until they supply the source code to anyone who rightfully can request it.
I will also point out that from my discussion with Xiangfu, they have used serial-USB to code it.
I have been removing the serial-USB code from cgminer for a while now, specifically due to what I believe ASIC requirements will be ... based on FPGA software design and performance ... I guess we'll see who can in fact write the best software for it ... and if I don't have a device to test it on, obviously it wont be me ... and these games with source code would suggest to me to ignore Avalon altogether, with regards to writing code, until they make it worth our while.
However, since they have indeed claimed to put GPL3 cgminer code into their device, I will continue to monitor that they do indeed adhere to the license ...
I will, however, be doing code for BFL and asicminer when they do supply the hardware - so if they are both close to doing that, I'll certainly be busy working on that as soon as I get the chance.
