![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Dave Jones wrote: > On Wed, Dec 13, 2006 at 09:39:11PM -0800, Martin J. Bligh wrote: > > > The Ubuntu feisty fawn mess was a dangerous warning bell of where we're > > going. If we don't stand up at some point, and ban binary drivers, we > > will, I fear, end up with an unsustainable ecosystem for Linux when > > binary drivers become pervasive. I don't want to see Linux destroyed > > like that. > > Thing is, if kernel.org kernels get patched to disallow binary modules, > whats to stop Ubuntu (or anyone else) reverting that change in the > kernels they distribute ? The landscape doesn't really change much, > given that the majority of Linux end-users are probably running > distro kernels. I don't think they'd dare spit in our faces quite that directly. They think binary modules are permissible because we don't seem to have consistently stated an intent contradicting that - some individual developers have, but ultimately Linus hasn't. I'm not talking about any legal issues to do with derived works, copyrights or licenses - a clear statement of intent is probably all it'd take to tip the balance. M. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2006-12-14 16:45 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||