On 5/16/08, Dieter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Linux Kernel Drivers (Framebuffer, DRI/DRI2) > > Windows Drivers > > > FreeBSD drivers > NetBSD drivers > OpenBSD drivers > Plan-9 drivers > OpenSolaris drivers > OS-X drivers > ...
Can we add a line that says "BSD and other OS drivers"? Or maybe it should be broken down this way: - Linux/UNIX kernel drivers - X11 modules - Windows drivers - Other OS drivers > > > Written submissions should be in OpenDoc or PDF format > > > Something wrong with plain text? Well, you do want to include diagrams, charts, graphs, and pretty colors, don't you? :) > > > > All > > proposals and the work carried out shall be licensed with GPL or compatible > > license, and suitable for submission to the OGD source repository. > > > The drivers need to have licenses that the various OS projects > will accept. Unfortunately some OSes refuse to include GPLed code > in the kernel. :-( Yeah. I urge people to use the following license scheme: - GPL for all hardware designs - GPL for microcode - GPL for stand-alone applications - MIT for BIOS, kernel drivers, and graphics drivers Hardware, microcode, and apps are their own things and don't need to be combined with anything else. On the other hand, drivers and BIOS (which is really just another driver) exist only to provide a software interface to the hardware. Driver code needs to be rewritten and recombined with other code for other OS's in order to support a maximum range of platforms and to avoid conflicts with other licenses and restrictions. If someone tries to close up our hardware or an app, that hurts us. If someone closes up some code from one of our drivers, it does nothing but expand the support for our hardware. -- Timothy Normand Miller http://www.cse.ohio-state.edu/~millerti Open Graphics Project _______________________________________________ Open-graphics mailing list [email protected] http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
