On 07/08/2015 04:25 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Wed, Jul 08, 2015 at 04:15:00PM -0400, Doug Ledford wrote: >> On 07/08/2015 04:02 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >>> So how about someone tells OFED to stop trying to enforce this BS? >> >> Unfortunately, simply "not enforcing" a bylaw of a multi-company >> organization isn't really a valid option, you should know that. You >> have to work to change the bylaw, which usually involves its own >> draconian process. > > Looks like it's time to get that started.
If they care to, then I'm sure they can. Unlike you, they might consider the dual license a benefit. > Or just tell OFED to piss off > because they really shouldn't be able to have that sort of influence > over code in the Linux kernel. OFED is a distribution made by the EWG that is a working group of the OFA. You can't tell OFED to piss off, it's an inanimate object. You *could* tell the EWG or OFA to do so. However, they don't really have influence over the linux kernel except that their members contribute more code to the RDMA stack than all other contributors combined by orders of magnitude. If an individual code contributor (read Avagotech) decides that they wish to comply with the EWG bylaws and make their own code compliant (read ocrdma driver), I have no problem with that. If this weren't their code, or if they weren't actively maintaining it and the primary contributors to its ongoing changes, it would be a different issue. But that's not the case, So I'm not inclined to take the stance you are. And since I know they are currently pursuing due diligence on getting permission to do so, I'm inclined to block further patches from non-Avagotech addresses until either the change is complete or abandoned. -- Doug Ledford <[email protected]> GPG KeyID: 0E572FDD
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
