Em 20-06-2011 17:24, HoP escreveu: > 2011/6/20 Devin Heitmueller <dheitmueller@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: >> On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 3:56 PM, HoP <jpetrous@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> Do you think it is really serious enough reason to prevent of having >>> such virtualization driver in the kernel? >>> >>> Let check my situation and tell me how I should continue (TBH, I already >>> thought that driver can be accepted, but my dumb brain thought because >>> of non quality code/design or so. It was really big "surprise" which >>> reason was used aginst it): >> >> Yes, this is entirely a political issue and not a technical one. > > Political? So we can declare that politics win (again) technicians. Sad. This is not a political issue. It is a licensing issue. If you want to use someone's else code, you need to accept the licensing terms that the developers are giving you, by either paying the price for the code usage (on closed source licensing models), or by accepting the license when using an open-sourced code. Preserving the open-source eco-system is something that everyone developing open source expect: basically, you're free to do whatever you want, but if you're using a code written by an open-source developer, the expected behaviour that GPL asks (and that the developer wants, when he opted for GPL) is that you should return back to the community with any changes you did, including derivative work. This is an essential rule of working with GPL. If you're not happy with that, that's fine. You can implement another stack that is not GPL-licensed. Mauro. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
