Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 30 Apr 2004 00:43:44 -0400 | From | Sean Estabrooks <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Blacklist binary-only modules lying about their license |
| |
On Thu, 29 Apr 2004 22:15:19 -0400 Marc Boucher <marc@linuxant.com> wrote:
<snip> > However we also believe that pragmatically bringing in support for key > hardware (which currently cannot otherwise be easily handled in the > traditional open-source approach) will benefit Linux, help it gain even > more usefulness/acceptance, and make larger numbers of exposed people > realize the natural advantages of open-source, then become > contributors. On the other hand, forcing open-source down throats with > impractical "tainting" schemes, scare tactics or other coercive methods > may achieve the opposite effect or turn Linux into just an > ideological/political movement rather than the ubiquitous operating > system it deserves to be. <snip>
Dear Marc,
Who decided that the goal was to become ubiquitous at any cost? How are you so sure that removing the incentive/reward for hardware vendors to release open source drivers is best for Linux in the long run?
In any case, should your goals trump those of active and senior kernel maintainers? They decided that tainting the kernel was appropriate. Forgive me for saying you seem more self righteous than sorry about your underhanded dealings with people you claim to respect.
Regards, Sean. - 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/
| |