Re: [PATCH] Blacklist binary-only modules lying about their license

[Sean Estabrooks]

On Thu, 29 Apr 2004 22:15:19 -0400
Marc Boucher <marc@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

<snip>
> However we also believe that pragmatically bringing in support for key 
> hardware (which currently cannot otherwise be easily handled in the 
> traditional open-source approach) will benefit Linux, help it gain even 
> more usefulness/acceptance, and make larger numbers of exposed people 
> realize the natural advantages of open-source, then become 
> contributors. On the other hand, forcing open-source down throats with 
> impractical "tainting" schemes, scare tactics or other coercive methods 
> may achieve the opposite effect or turn Linux into just an 
> ideological/political movement rather than the ubiquitous operating 
> system it deserves to be.
<snip>

Dear Marc,

Who decided that the goal was to become ubiquitous at any cost?  How
are you so sure that removing the incentive/reward for hardware vendors
to release open source drivers is best for Linux in the long run?   

In any case, should your goals trump those of active and senior kernel
maintainers?  They decided that tainting the kernel was appropriate. 
Forgive me for saying you seem more self righteous than sorry about your
underhanded dealings with people you claim to respect.

Regards,
Sean.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/