lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Nov]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: scsi target, likely GPL violation
On Fri, 09 Nov 2012 11:52:19 -0800
Andy Grover <agrover@redhat.com> wrote:

> On 11/09/2012 03:03 AM, Alan Cox wrote:
> > I fail to understand the maintainer question however. If you were trying
> > to block people adding target features that competed that would be a
> > different thing.
>
> You think it's ok for us to have an unrepentant GPL violator as a
> subsystem maintainer??
>
> If that's really what you're saying then I think that's crazy.

If he was a GPL violator and had been shown so it would be.

However it's alleged GPL violator, and we could have the same argument
about say Nvidia or half a dozen other contributors and companies before
we get to things like the GPLv2 versus DRM question (all the necessary
scripts including the key).

But RH could always sue him, or simply provide an open alternative I
guess (or indeed let secure boot and the RHEL plans for it put him out of
business) ;)

Alan


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-11-09 22:01    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site