On Tue, Feb 14, 2006 at 02:10:02PM +0100, Sven Schmidt wrote: > This mail is not intended to provoke a discussion of open vs. closed > source. > The only intention of this mail is to make you aware of the consequences of > such a decision.
It is not helpful if you whine about a change/decision if you are not willing to do discuss with people about alternative solutions. Your last mail to linux-kernel and this mailing list was answered by Greg Kroah-Hartman who suggested to implement the drivers in user space. To be honest I see no reason why this should not be possible for you. But this is not the main point but the main point is that you did not react to Greg's mail. The solution he suggested (and that would be much cleaner than the current way of doing it in my opinion anyway) would also solve this problem for you without the need to open source the critical parts of your drivers. I am a content users of some of your products. But I am a bit confused about what you expect from your mails here if you don't work together with people offering their assistance. Are these mails just to form an angry mob of frustrated users to do some pressure on Novell/SUSE or are you really willing to find solutions? The point that I also did not like about the whole GPL kernel drivers issue is that it was not announced in time but that it was announced only after everything was already broken without having a replacement installed at that time. But apart from that it was the way to go if some of the kernel developers consider it a problem to have binary-only modules linked to the kernel. Robert -- Robert Schiele Tel.: +49-621-181-2214 Dipl.-Wirtsch.informatiker mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] "Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur."
pgpjWVDjYXREz.pgp
Description: PGP signature
