Talk:TRON Project

message: This page should probably be moved/renamed to TRON Project or TRON (Operating System Architecture) or TRON (Operating System Framework) or similar as TRON isn't really an operating system but a (mostly finished) project to develop a series of specifications of operating systems architectures based on the foundational framework originally developed by Ken Sakamura. E.g. the Introduction to the ITRON Project at the ITRON Project Home Page lists a dozen or so concrete implementations of ITRON-specifications for a wide range of microprocessors. Tobias Bergemann 07:15, 2004 Oct 14 (UTC)
* I have begun editing and improving this article, it should be much better soon. Wackymacs 19:39, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: This page should

message: The specification of TRON is open, but the code generators are not required to make their source free unlike with the GNU General Public License.
Is this a fair comparison? TRON only provides set of interfaces and design guidelines, but no source. Does this mean that an operating system written from scratch, designed after an GPL'ed kernel, for example Linux has to be GPL'ed too? 129.241.138.64 14:34, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Depends whether it's a "derivative work" which is probably something you'd need lawyers to argue about. Kundor 04:40, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

text: No, I think the comparison depends on whether TRON's source code is publicly available or not.  If TRON's specification is only publicly available and not its source code, then there's no sense comparing it with the requirements of the GNU GPL.  It's better to compare it with a standard like TCP/IP, not with a copyright license. --71.254.10.81 15:28, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Keep in mind there is no "TRON's source code". There are many different implementations of of TRON. In many cases iTRON is simply implemented as a compatibility layer on top of an existing commercial RTOS. The comparison to TCP/IP is apt, though better comparisons would be to OSEK or POSIX. To answer the original question, one wouldn't bother taking about the GPL status of POSIX.192.88.165.35 14:19, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Specification or source 

message: Does anyone know anything about this ? 24.13.69.212 02:10, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I know. The USTR included TRON into their list of "Super 301 clause of the Omnibus Trade Act" in 1989, and warned Matsushita and other companies to be risen importing taxes up towards their products. As these companies exported their products to the US, they have no choice except stop joining from the TRON project. You can find some articles by googling keywords such as "super 301" and "tron". --Eveningmist 16:32, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  US Government Blockage? 

message: Isn't it possible to add any info regarding TRON's licensing issues? At the moment there isn't a single shred of info covering that and, being a vital property of today's sofware, it should be mentioned in the article, specially regarding TRON's royalties. --Mecanismo | Talk 19:12, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Licensing issues? 

message: The link to Ubiquitous computing center is incorrect. It should point to http://www.uidcenter.org/index-en.html whereas it currently points to http://www.uidcenter.org/index.html . Jalsagujals (talk) 06:44, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect link 

message: As of 2003, the TRON system (or more specifically the ITRON derivative) is one of the world's most used operating systems, being present in millions of electronic devices.
Even though a link to a source where this statement comes from is given, the article should at least list some example devices that actually use TRON. --Abdull (talk) 15:02, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where is it used?