Re: A compromise that could have been reached. Re: [PATCH] Blacklistbinary-only modules lying about their license

From: Timothy Miller
Date: Fri Apr 30 2004 - 16:34:55 EST




Marc Boucher wrote:

Indeed. The driver in question contains 8 interdependent modules. What we were thinking of doing to settle the issue short-term in a fair way for both our users and kernel developers, is removing the \0 from the central one (hsfengine), causing the kernel to be properly tainted and one instance of the messages to be automatically printed when the driver is used.

Hopefully the community will view this as an acceptable compromise. Once patches have propagated onto people's computers, we will be happy to remove all \0's completely.


At this point, you're not going to get any slack. If this is what you'd done to start with, you might have gotten away with it. As it stands, you appear to be unwilling to comply with the rules, except as a last resort when you've been flamed for days.

I think what you need to do right now is do a lot of begging. I agree that in principle, it's only technically necessary to have one of the modules taint the kernel. But it's still "bad" to lie about the module license and should only be done after much scrutiny and discussion.

So if everyone who has a stake in this agrees to let you do it, then go ahead. Otherwise, sorry Charley, but you're SOL.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/