I bought one because it's just pocket money and I wanted to see which Microchip PIC it uses and if you actually got access to a schematic if you bought one (you don't unless things have changed since the…
I suspect that you are right and that the reference to CC in the Kickstarter was simply to attract support by implying community sharing without any intention of actually delivering. The PiFace crew (same…
I'm missing something here - why not order one from Farnell - worked for me.
(although why you want one remains a mystery !)
Instead me too want one and I have done a mistake so I can't buy From Spain there is a limit of 50 Euro min for buying. Just yesterday I have ordered two Raspi PI and another stuff... I was SURE I was forgetting something and it was. I forgot to order a codebug ! Result I can't buy it until the next big order.
I bought one because it's just pocket money and I wanted to see which Microchip PIC it uses and if you actually got access to a schematic if you bought one (you don't unless things have changed since the weekend). This is weird (to put it kindly) since on the Kickstarter campaign they promised it would be open hardware. If I ever get round to it (it's not a priority) I'll trace out the circuit and work out how to gaol break the PIC. It has some test points that look as if they might give access to a PIC debug port - if so you could use usual Microchip tools to write some proper code.
I can't help thinking how much better the whole thing would be if they had used an ARM Cortex based micro with a decent amount of RAM (it has 2k) - it might have cost a tiny bit more but would have been so much more useful.
The reference is still there on this page - scroll down a long way to just under the Union flag.
It should be interpreted. And I think that they played over this...
CodeBug will be released under a Creative Commons license so everyone can remix and make their own bugs. If you've never done any circuit board design, don't worry, we'll even show you how you could do this too!
By a licensing point of view, first of all it is not explained what kind of CC is used (there are at least three). For example: SA-NC-ND is ShareAlike, NoCommercial, NoDerivative. Means that you should use it as-is, can integrate in your project but as the license is threaded, your project itself can't be commercial. Instead of SA-$ means that you can create your own product also for commercial usage, and you should cite the device. In short words the CC licenses are progressively restrictive, from the simple CC-BY where you are obliged simply to mention the original attribution up to CC BY-NC-ND where you are obliged to mention the attribution, only for non commercial use and explicitly you can't make derivate products integrating the licensed device.
In this scenario the CC license is not expressed at all without the specific version (actually the most used are 2.0 and 3.0) and without the licensing legal coverage in human readable form As a matter is like just to say "this is mine" nothing more. You can find all the license types and how the CC protection involves respect the protected opera in the following link: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/
Then there is another aspect. The CC mentioned (that IMO remain senseless as it is expressed) does not mention implicitly nothing that we should expect from them but just only what we can't expect from them. In the case of a device (hardware) or software the CC is almost ineffective, as it has been though for the protection of operas like music, text, documents etc. To have effect should be accomplished by a licensing for software and hardware, separately. If they does not explicitly declare that the software is released under a specific software license (hopefully a open source one e.g. MIT, Apache, GNU etc.) and the same for hardware with a open hardware license, the only thing they say is "you can buy your unit, place it inside your project, as you prefer and enjoy.
My conclusion is that if we want to know more on the internal architecture of the codebug the only way is to reverse-engineering it.