> I think "tightly integrated" could do with some clarification here. > qcserial was accepted despite not being functional without a closed > userspace component - an open one's since been rewritten to allow it to
It got as far as staging with a good deal of complaint. I am not sure it would have gotten further unfixed (with my serial/tty maintainers hat on ;)). That however was about firmware - so a lot less tightly coupled. > work. Do we define "tightly integrated" as "likely to cross the GPL > line" (potentially the case with Poulsbo, not the case with qcserial), > or is it a pragmatic issue? What about specialised hardware drivers that > only have closed applications? Ultimately - ask a lawyer, ultimately this is a question about works and copyright boundaries. If the hardware has only some specific proprietary app then it sounds to me like it's not a general kernel interface so probably isn't a good interface anyway, let alone what the code may do. Alan ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Enter the BlackBerry Developer Challenge This is your chance to win up to $100,000 in prizes! For a limited time, vendors submitting new applications to BlackBerry App World(TM) will have the opportunity to enter the BlackBerry Developer Challenge. See full prize details at: http://p.sf.net/sfu/Challenge -- _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list Dri-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
