On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 2:07 PM, Cornelius <[email protected]> wrote: > On 05/22/2009 02:56 PM, Glen Gray wrote: > >> On Fri, 2009-05-22 at 08:27 -0400, Ryan VanMiddlesworth wrote: >> >>> On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 8:46 PM, Greg KH<[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> What was bizarre and obtuse about my comments? Is it wrong for me to >>>> wish to have peopel abide by the license of my contribution to the >>>> kernel? >>>> >>> I'm not particularly interested in dragging this out, but you asked, >>> so here's how I saw it go down: >>> >>> The guy shows up and helpfully posts directions and files for getting >>> Moblin's wireless working on one of the most popular netbooks out >>> there (the Dell Mini 9). We all know Broadcom has a misguided policy >>> on copyright, and what most people would have said is, "Thanks for >>> your effort, but you're not technically allowed to distribute that >>> driver because it contains a binary blob." Case closed. >>> >>> Instead, you decide to drag out some sort of passive-aggressive public >>> shaming ritual over the course of several emails. What was >>> particularly annoying to me is that usually this sort of treatment is >>> reserved for new users of open source software (sadly). You, however, >>> decided it was a necessary tactic in dealing with some poor guy who is >>> simply trying to contribute to the project. >>> >> >> Ryan, >> >> I appreciate the support. I do. But I'm not so naive to not have known >> what Greg was going on about from the get go. Yes, his passive >> aggressive approach was a strange one to take. I simply played along >> getting him to spell it out hoping as many people would get to nab the >> drivers along the way. >> >> I certainly took no offense to his request. He has made significant >> contributions to the Linux kernel that we all love to use and is >> entitled to make the request under the terms of the license. That's why >> I took it down without any protest. The finger of blame here is easy to >> point to Greg, but if you follow it through it should go all the way >> back to Broadcom. >> >> There's a howto for those of use unfortunate enough to have a broadcom >> driver issue, hopefully it's easy to follow. If anyone has suggestions >> for changes to the HowTo I'm all ears. >> >> Kind Regards, >> > What I simply don't understand here is why Greg doesn't sue Broadcom (the > root of all evil ;)) but instead he's fighting against the 'small players' > and the users who would just like to use WLAN and who have bought some > broadcom chipset. This certainly doesn't improve anything in regards to the > copyright issue except that we now have some annoyed users more.
What should happen is for users/customers to complain to Broadcom for the state of affairs with the network drivers, and possibly avoid buying hardware that have unsupported hardware. If someone is really "uninitiated" in open-source development and new to the field, they would probably lose interest in open-source software (from Greg's initial response). What should Greg do is use canned responses in these situations or simply delegate the replying to the rest of the list. Simos _______________________________________________ Moblin dev Mailing List [email protected] To manage or unsubscribe from this mailing list visit: https://lists.moblin.org/mailman/listinfo/dev or your user account on http://moblin.org once logged in. For more information on the Moblin Developer Mailing lists visit: http://moblin.org/community/mailing-lists
