Advertisement
Front, Kernel, Security, Distributions, Development. See your byline here on LWN.net.
| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
A position statement on closed-source kernel modulesA position statement on closed-source kernel modulesPosted Jun 23, 2008 21:48 UTC (Mon) by dmarti (subscriber, #11625)In reply to: A position statement on closed-source kernel modules by lrosen Parent article: A position statement on closed-source kernel modules
Larry, imagine if it were something like, "We, the maintainers of the exampleware SMTP library, which is under the GPL, believe that email spam is bad." The maintainers aren't saying that they'll try to block spammers' right to use the library, or that a particular spammer is or isn't breaking the law -- just that if you get on the exampleware mailing list and ask for help using the library to send spam you're not likely to get far.
(Log in to post comments)
A position statement on closed-source kernel modules Posted Jun 24, 2008 0:15 UTC (Tue) by lrosen (guest, #31972) [Link] As I tried to say, if the kernel developers are stating a desire, or even a policy with respect to their own involvement and support for non-open software, I welcome it and share that goal. My concern is only that some have translated that into a legal imperative, which it isn't.
|
|
||||||||||||