Hello there, Before reading the mail, be brave people read this blog post first, especially people from FESCo: http://www.edn.com/blog/920000692/post/1290038929.html Do comment on that blog post. Afterwards you read my email. ------------------------------------------------------------- I found it sad that I have to write this email today. Well, it is part of my contribution to both opensource software and opensource EDA software communities. The subject of this email is "Fedora Project, give me 20 Million Euros or Free Software" ! Unfortunately, I'm not kidding and even 20 Million Euros is not enough. Well, let's get to the point ! -- Abstract ---------------------------------------------- I wish to maintain a package called OVM. This package is opensourced by the two giant EDA Vendors : Cadence and Mentor Graphics, under the Apache 2.0 license. However, since there is no opensource tool to use OVM, FESCo has freezed its entry. Since when opensource software is more important than opensource content ? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=474980 -- About OVM: Open Verification Methodology ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The OVM is based on the IEEE 1800 SystemVerilog standard and supports design and verification engineers developing advanced verification environments that offer higher levels of integration and portability of Verification IP. The methodology is non-vendor specific and is interoperable with multiple languages and simulators. The OVM is fully open, and includes a robust class library and source code that is available for download. -- Explanation of the "Don't kill OpenSource EDA software and its community" cry ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- About 90% of the opensource software you can use it as a replacement of another proprietary software. However in the EDA industry this is not true. There is NO EDA software (whether proprietary or opensource) that can replace another. If someone tells you the contrary, export him/her to planet Mars on the spot. NO EDA software is used by users as the rpm is provided. For each project, you will need to tweak the software as a user. That's one of the reasons why frontend digital designers like Tcl and Perl. Unlike the rest of the opensource SOFTWARE packagers, my users have NO interest in opensource EDA design tools if in the end they can't produce hardware with them!! Why ? I have 2 types of users ! the students and the hardware amateurs. But these are not the ones I'm fighting for ! I'm fighting to seduce the right people to encourage mass Fedora deployment with EDA tools. These "right" people are lecturers and EDA engineers. You have noticed that I didn't mention "analog/digital" engineers yet. Lecturers will _find_ the right tools for the students so that they can market themselves when looking for a job. EDA engineers will be _contacted_ by big vendors to help him choose the right tool for his/her "analog/digital" engineers. Some EDA engineers will even be invited for several expensive hotels/dinners. While the opensource software community talks about how they are proud of AIGLX, fedora, OOo, Amarok, KDE4,..., I am sad to say that I can not say the same for Open Hardware. With Fedora Electronic Lab, we do not only attracted users with respect to opensource EDA tools, but FEL contributors are heavily divided into the following communities: - opensource software : by shipping free EDA tools - open Hardware : by targeting these persons I will only consider that WE were successful with FEL if open Hardware projects/companies HAVE USED opensource EDA tools to design their hardware. This is a goal. A goal to reach and show what we can achieved with opensource software. I'm not talking about ghdl being used to simulate OpenSparc T2 for example, I'm talking about completing the whole Open Hardware project to Silicon. Amateurs/home made pcbs is simple. Bridging these two communities, give us(Fedora)[#1] extra responsibilities, which we are currently the opensource Leader in EDA deployment. These responsibilities include maintaining the health of the opensource EDA software community and encourage continuous deployment. Unlike the opensource Linux ECO system, the EDA world is dictated by: - research and development in silicon. - infinite number of standards. - various quality-class proprietary EDA tools are available for free download - .... Among the industry standards, OVM IEEE 1800 SystemVerilog standard is under an acceptable license for Fedora's inclusion. As you have surely guessed the ODF standard was not made standard by some cheap geeks. It costs money, time and development strategy. We (opensource community) have nothing such thing to create a standard for electronics! We don't currently have an opensource simulator for SystemVerilog. Now imagine OOo without ODF support. Will the opensource software community dump the ODF initiative ? We don't have human resources[2] to just pop a simulator tool for systemverilog out of the blue. Growing Numbers of SV users: http://theasicguy.com/2009/01/27/dvcon-survey-results-what-do-they-mean/ You have certainly heard couple thousands layoffs in the semiconductor industry this month. Companies are taking drastic measures to cut expenses, I believe FEL will be attractive for them. Unlike the normal fedora user, these companies will do mass fedora deployments from the Note[1]. http://edablog.com/2009/01/12/edac-mss-q32008/ VMM also suffers the same issue. --- Additional notes: [#1] I referred "us(Fedora)[#1]" because I strongly believe Fedora IS THE ONLY ANSWER for the opensource EDA community. Sorry, users from non-Fedora-based distribution should seriously change their professional career if they are doing ASIC design. Why ? : Electronic Design Automation Consortium has established EDA Industry OS Roadmap guidelines for which platforms EDA vendors and customers should target for design starts. http://www.edac.org/industry_roadmap.jsp#roadmap For Linux Users, you have RHEL and SLES. Please don't get excited Linux was attractive because Vista failed to impress the EDA market. If Windows 7 prove otherwise, EDA Vendors will provide less Linux support. While these are proprietary software, they are the only way to program their hardware devices. Take for example, you buy a development FPGA kit from Altera or Xilinx, you can only program your FPGA will their free tools on windows. It is free and users don't need to care about its source code as they can have good support from their vendors. Hence, I have shown you how my users will think and how easy we can lose linux users. I'm not talking about helping proprietary software, but avoid dumping software that have been opensourced and are still being maintained. [#2]. human resources[2] : Unlike a normal software, electronic simulation tools should be mature. Because the hardware being developed are the one you will find in your brand new cars, airplanes, in various medical devices. Since these are life critical applications, the designer will not want a 2-week developed simulator. That is why I'm saying that I don't think we will see a simulator so soon. According to FESCo, no simulator -> no entry. Hence I see, no OVM entry before the next five years and I will have to inform the opensource EDA community that either the major opensource EDA Leader has discarded the appreciation of this opensource content and initiative. --- Conclusion -------------------------------------------------------------------- Have a look around you further than fedora. Have a global view on the Linux communities. Answer the following questions: - Who is the one focussing on electronics for the best electronic user experience ? Hint : compare Ngspice release and LTSpice release ! - Why is that one giving better solutions and user experience ? - Has OS user experience being more important than electronic design experience ? - Can you bear that you have deliberately giving up Open content ? Unlike OOo which tends to give OS user experience by replacing Microsoft Office. For FEL, I don't have replacement of 70% of the proprietary tools. If you are shutting down the doors on OVM, you are also claiming fedora is not promoting open content, but only OS user experience ? I would recommend FESCo to cancel/revisit each Feature wiki page proposal as they provide more than OS user experience. Also have a look at the EDA community promoting our Fedora everywhere: http://jamespurser.com.au/blog/Open_Source_Startup_Group_-_An_Update google for more. Iverilog (which to me had more chance to provide SystemVerilog support quickly) are focussing on Verilog-AMS which is also very important. Mixed signal is all around now. The opensource EDA community don't have that human resources. The 20 Million Euros is about balancing the losses of that OVM was turned down. perl-Verilog currently under the Fedora umbrella has incorporated some extra systemverilog support. This new release will hit fedora mirrors today. I am not attacking anyone. I'm just reflecting the current reality. If Fedora is not an answer for opensource EDA software, the opensource community You will laugh about this : Give me an example of a software that is free in windows but need a license on Linux. It is the case in Electronics. Help me find an answer to: "What are the verification solutions Fedora provide ?" What can opensource software community answer when EDA vendors give away their software for free ? http://www.eeproductcenter.com/embedded/brief/showArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=RWRCCHW5FOFZIQSNDLRCKH0CJUNN2JVN?articleID=212902950 I'm going to sleep with failure in my mind. Good night. A mature opensource EDA software costs at least 20 Million Euros. Don't dump opensource CONTENT! PS: in Belgium today, we have carried out meteorological measurements with Hardware designed under Fedora. Kind regards, Chitlesh -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
