nanogui: Request for comments - Microwindows
Subject:
Re: Request for comments - Microwindows
From:
"Bradley D. LaRonde" ####@####.####
Date:
4 Oct 1999 21:39:03 -0000
Message-Id: <03b701bf0eaf$e9e751e0$b8119526@ltc.com>
----- Original Message -----
From: Alex Holden ####@####.####
To: Bradley D. LaRonde ####@####.####
Cc: ####@####.#### ####@####.####
Sent: Monday, October 04, 1999 5:01 PM
Subject: Re: Request for comments - Microwindows
> On Mon, 4 Oct 1999, Bradley D. LaRonde wrote:
> > So if I'm understanding you right, you are saying that we might have an
> > opportunity with Micro* to do something similar, but only if we GPL the
> > server part (or maybe LGPL?), but definately not MPL it. Is that right?
>
> Because of the restrictive nature of the GPL, you can't legally link
> proprietory code into it. The Linux kernel on Intel PCs, with millions of
> potential users, is just starting to become popular enough that we can
> actually force some hardware vendors to release specs to allow a GPLed
> driver to be written, or to even write a GPLed driver themselves. Up till
> fairly recently, and with less common hardware, this didn't usually work,
> and a lot of hardware had to be reverse engineered.
I don't mind reverse engineering something. The tempting thing is when a
vender says they'll give you the specs but you can't release anything but a
binary. That is something to avoid IMO. Maybe it is better to reverse
engineer it than to cave to the vendor's desires.
Why give up your right to release source code? Why not tell that vendor
"I'll sign and NDA, but only with the condition that I can release my work
open-source." I have.
> How long do you think
> it'll be before Nano-X on Foo obscure Palmtop or embedded system has
> enough millions of users for a hardware manufacturer to be forced into
> releasing a GPLed driver or specs for somebody to write a GPLed driver for
> it? Roughly never?
If Linux was guided from the start by that thinking, it may never have made
it to that point either.
I think that GPL is the answer for the server part.
Do we believe in this thing or not? I do.
Are we willing to reverse engineer a few devices? Are we willing to have to
write some extra code now and then? I am.
So let's just take a deep breath, GPL the server part, go forward, and not
look back.
As for the client part, same thing execpt add an L before the GPL.
Regards,
Brad
