Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 12th Jan 2012 22:54 UTC
Permalink for comment 503093
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 21:41 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-01-24
GPL has its advantages. But it really is a tragedy that we can't (or won't) give them our driver code. Lot's of work there that will need to be duplicated. Of course, there is a lot more to porting such a driver than getting over the licensing hurdles. Especially considering the graphics memory management differences. Sun (hypothetically) changing their licence on ZFS would likely have made no difference to Linux's collection of filesystems. But still, it's a damn shame. These guys are our allies. And we have to refuse to give them code because that would make it available to our enemies.
Well I've always thought BSD or LGPL is the 'best' licence for 'driver/library/framework'-type code, but then again that's just my personal preference.
At the end of the day it's up to the actual programmers writing the code, or those paying them to write it to decide which licence to use.