On Thursday 05 April 2007, Michael Buesch wrote: >On Thursday 05 April 2007 22:21, Gene Heskett wrote: >> On Thursday 05 April 2007, Michael Buesch wrote: >> >On Thursday 05 April 2007 07:41, Marcus Glocker wrote: >> >> I wanted to make some quick progress (maybe too quick), and rewrite >> >> the functions in question after seeing some first success, e.g. >> >> receivment of first frames, which isn't the case right now. But >> >> still, the specs for some functions are so strict, writing tons >> >> of registers in a strict order, some parts will still look similar. >> > >> >To make it clear. We are not issueing any copyright claims on >> >these magic register sequences. >> >This is only about algorithms and so on. I mentioned the LO state >> >machine, for example. >> > >> >> The last thing I want is to start a license war with you guys, >> >> and also I don't want to harm OpenBSD further with this issue. >> >> And of course we want to solve that license issue ASAP. >> >> >> >> So, I am suggestion three options: >> >> >> >> 1. You give me some time and I try to rewrite the code >> >> in question. We keep in touch, and maybe we can split >> >> up both parties in freedom afterwards. >> >> >> >> 2. Same as option one, but if my time resources keep >> >> shrinking like they do right now, spending weekends >> >> in the office and I can't fix up the driver soon, >> >> I'll drop the driver. >> >> >> >> 3. We don't come to a point and I'll plain drop the driver >> >> directly, very soon. >> > >> > 4. bcm43xx people review the driver and think about relicensing >> > (parts of) bcw, so you don't have to rewrite it. >> > We don't want to distrurb bcw development, but we don't like >> > the harsh way of taking code without permission and asking >> > for permission afterwards. >> > If you want to have more code relicensed, please ask on a >> > case-by-case base _before_ importing it into bcw. >> >> I find the lack of being able to read both sides of this thread >> without being subscribed to the BSD lists rather upsetting. Please, >> if one side of this fight is going to carry on this discussion on a >> public list, then both sides should. > >http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.wireless.general/1558
Now having read the full thread, and considering Theo's widely known personality, then add in that I was once chastized for asking what I considered to be a valid question at the time, by none other than Michael, I must say that both of you need to come to the table with productive ideas and quit acting like children. Did you, Theo, ever consider that the refusable to cross license the other code mentioned, just might have a teeny wee bit of a bearing on how Micheal would respond when, after requesting some BSD code and being told to go fish, that Michael in turn might be more than a little upset to find his code, essentialy verbatum but sans credits in a BSD cvs repo? I think Michael reacted relatively peacefully considering that the code is in the wild now, without his copyright. Think about it, both of you, and then do the right thing for both distributions. IMO, deleting the offending code was, in this case not the optimum path to have traveled, particularly since bsd needs that code. There are a couple dozen boatloads of machines out there using this chipset. Including a lappy I bought a year ago. -- Cheers, Gene "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) The clash of ideas is the sound of freedom. _______________________________________________ Bcm43xx-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/bcm43xx-dev
