On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 09:27:24 -0500, Timothy Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm not sure I CAN have an update. I just don't have enough > information. However, my uninformed opinion is that we can release > MOST of the driver source under an open source license that is BSD or > MIT style and tell people that if they want to build the driver, they > have to either get the MS DDK. If we can find another way to do it, > that's great too, but I don't see it as such a big deal. Most people > won't use the source to the Windows version. Most people won't use > the source to the Mac or Solaris versions either, even though those > would be totally open source.
Yes my exact thought. We can just partition, the code into parts that will allow it to be released under some free license. I for one do not care if the code only compile using Visual Studio and some proprietary DDK, as I have all of them - it is also my opinion, that anybody serious about helping with the Windows driver, will own the appropriate tools for doing so. If somebody can com up with a free develop environment (perhaps using MinGW and some free DDK), then that is grate to, I just do not see it as such a big problem. Anyway thanks for your answer, the only reason i requested the info from you was because Windows licensing is a big mess and I hoped that perhaps TechSource had some knowledge about it. _______________________________________________ Open-graphics mailing list [email protected] http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
