[lkml]   [2006]   [Jun]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [RFC/PATCH 1/2] in-kernel sockets API
    Chase Venters wrote:
    > At least some of us feel like stable module APIs should be explicitly
    > discouraged, because we don't want to offer comfort for code that
    > refuses to live in the tree (since getting said code into the tree is
    > often a goal).
    > I'm curious now too - can you name some non-GPL non-proprietary
    > modules we should be concerned about? I'd think most of the possible
    > examples (not sure what they are) would be better off dual-licensed
    > (one license being GPL) and in-kernel.

    What about GPL modules that don't want to get merged ? I don't know any
    such module that could use this API. But at least there are some webcam
    drivers that don't seem to want to be merged (I don't know why).

    I agree with making life hard for proprietary modules. I agree that
    maintaining a stable API is hard. But I don't see the actual point of
    discouraging modules to stay out of tree.


    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2006-06-14 06:58    [W:0.039 / U:4.880 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site