endusers are not the same ballgame, because endusers run compiled code and do not touch touch the code...
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
ATI R300 Mesa, Gallium3D Compared To Catalyst
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by monraaf View PostI don't know who is 'moonraf', but I suspect you're referring to me. For the kernel side of the graphics stack (i.e. drm) GPL should be fine. I'm quite aware that for users space libraries the situation is a little different and that's why I wrote that I would be in favor of the LGPL license.
In any case, I'm not so sure about whether it would be fine to license the drm bits to the GPL. When I say I'm not so sure I mean that I don't know it at all. For what I've heard, the kernel and userland components are tightly integrated, so I wonder whether the GPL restrictions wouldn't matter. Anybody here could shed some light about this?
Comment
-
Originally posted by monraaf View PostI don't think you'll find many in the Linux community who have some kind of hatred against BSD/MIT/X11 license. There are people who'd rather not contribute to projects under such license, but they don't hate it.
You see that's the difference. It's a fact that there's a lot of hatred against the GPL license, maybe not by you. But it's definitely there in the BSD community.
And you yourself didn't use the loaded term leech just because.
Comment
-
Originally posted by elanthis View PostLinux has the GPL, and Linux is more popular, QED?
You know, the global temperature has steadily increased while the number of pirates in the world has steadily decreased. That correlation must be a proof of causation! Pirates keep the world cool! It's science!
Comment
-
Originally posted by nanonyme View PostAnd all end-users are by definition leeches whereas developers are contributors? I find it hard to find a point in this kind of arguing unless the point is to try to make people feel guilty.
Comment
Comment