Artur Grabowski wrote: > "Stephan A. Rickauer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I did read your FAQ but I can't see how it rebuts what has > > just been said. You seem to be happy with signing NDAs. If the > > result is a readable and understandable GPL'ed driver, > > companies will be even less motivated to release programming > > documentation. This will lead to a GPL-lock-in since you > > simply replace the vendor not willing to share specifications > > with an NDA'ed GPL developer not willing to share those, but > > GPL code only. > > Which is exactly what the GPL people want since that's the whole > point of the license. Otherwise they wouldn't be using the > GPL. Duh.
Nah, RMS doesn't want this. A lot of `GPL people' don't want this at all. This deal is meant to divide. # Han
