Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 14 Jan 1999 00:54:57 -0500 | From | Richard Stallman <> | Subject | Re: linux-kernel-digest V1 #3074 |
| |
>When such an important piece of free software as Linux contains ads >for proprietary software, it gives the whole community an unfortunate >message--not the sort of message will inspire people to write >additional free drivers.
On the contrary. Its *exactly* the fact that there wasn't a good *free* driver for the Turtle Beach WaveFront soundcards that made me write one.
I'm sure you're right about what motivated you, but I see no contradiction between this and what I said. Pointing out the lack of a good free driver is one thing, and advertising a non-free one is another thing.
I think that many of the potential device driver writing community are of a similar bent: the existence of a proprietary non-open-source driver acts as a stimulant to produce an open source one so that we can all benefit.
If awareness of the existence of a tantalizingly useful but socially unacceptable program will help motivate people to write a replacement, there is more than one way to spread that awareness among potential driver writers. It's not necessary to give particulars about where that program might be obtained, or discuss the issue in a place where users in general will look for advice on what to install.
One way could be an item in a TODO file, saying, "We need a free driver for the FOO card, since right now only proprietary drivers exist." Posting a message to this mailing list would also be effective, since most people interested in writing drivers probably read it.
These approaches would spread the word that can do some good, where it can do some good, without the undesirable effect of advertising the proprietary program. The awareness of the lack of a free driver will not motivate people who think a non-free driver is ok. We mustn't take for granted that people will believe a non-free driver needs a free replacement, if we seem to say the opposite.
I saw just how much we are failing to get this point across from a message that was forwarded to me this week. It comes from a sound card manufacturer. I've blanked out the names of the company and the card, because the specific company isn't the point.
XXXX intends to put out two equally important pieces for the Linux community.
1) An OSS Binary driver that can be used in the next few months from a company called 4Front. This will allow Linux users to begin using their YYYY immediately, while XXXX becomes more familiar with Linux. This solves the immediate issue of a YYYY working on Linux.
2) Longer term we will produce a library(.LIB) that can be linked into ALSA, OSS, or what ever. This library will expose the features of the chip and will allow for additional functionality to be added. I suspect this is what most people are actually asking for.
They think that these pieces of non-free software are what the "Linux" community needs and wants. So far, this looks like a common scenario, a company inviting us to give up our freedom and use their stuff. But they continue:
In addition, we will write some form of programmers reference guide to the chip so that anyone not interested in using the library can program their own driver.
How interesting! This company is NOT, as some companies do, deliberately denying us the crucial information. They are willing to release the specs, willing to cooperate with making a free driver. So why do they propose to satisfy us with non-free software? It is because *they don't realize that a free driver is important for us*. This company is entirely ready to cooperate with us, but they think that giving us a non-free driver and library is is 99% of the cooperation we want. They think that releasing the specs is just a way of being extra nice!
If they got their ideas from reading the OSS README and HOW-TO, that's what they would naturally think. They don't know we need a free driver, because we have failed to say so clearly; meanwhile, those documents forcefully convey the opposite impression.
In the future, let's make sure this is clear.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |