On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 02:23:49PM -0800, Greg KH wrote: > On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 11:07:53PM +0100, RafaÅ MiÅecki wrote: > > 2010/12/8 Henry Ptasinski <henryp@xxxxxxxxxxxx>: > > > Second attempt at cleaning up firmware filenames. > > > > > > The basename-apiversion-codeversion construction for firmware filenames is not > > > used by most other firmware files, adds complexity, and is not providing any > > > value. ÂRenamed the firmware files using just basename-apiversion. ÂAlso, fixed > > > WHENCE to have correct path to brcmfmac files. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Henry Ptasinski <henryp@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Henry, I believe we got report that Red Hat can not include your > > firmware anyway because of licensing. Can you change license to some > > common one which allows providing your firmware with distributions? > > That's news to me, what specific licensing issue have you heard about > here? Last I saw, the issues were resolved and everyone could > redistribute this firmware. On a thread about other firmware, Dan Williams wrote: > There's an existing Broadcom license in linux-firmware.git, and it *may* > be OK, but it's really, really long and given that other major companies > adopted the "shorter is better" approach, it's hard to believe that all > the existing Broadcom license text is actually needed. I'm not sure that translates to "can not include your firmware". Regardless, I am trying to get our license simplified. Obviously that's taking some time, and I don't have any resolution yet, but I'll keep working on it. - Henry _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
