It Could Be A While Before Seeing The Tamil GPU Driver Code

[CTown]

Ignore the detractors. You'll get many thanks for releasing an open-source graphics driver; especially on this forum. In fact, it has been proven that there are quite a few people who will take a less functional open-source driver over the proprietary one. People here cheer on every single release of radeonhd and Nouveau! Many of those people will not care too much about code quality (as that can be fixed in a newer version). I say release the code in order to attract new people to the project.

**Also, remember this site has a lot of overly opinionated folks, a.k.a. trolls. Don't get distracted by those guys!**

[nanonyme]

What matter? There is nothing in the logs about GPL code? Are you suggesting that one should not release open source code, lest someone reads it and thus cannot reimplement it as propriatery code? Putting code out there does not force others to read it...

Ugh, yeah. Somewhat of a brainfart in phrasing. Libv and that other fella just had a pretty long chat about taintedness. It's a real risk both ways with GPL code but with MIT (as in this case) you can can only end up tainting code, not get tainted by it. Move along

[pal666]

It is everybodys own priviledge to decide what code to write and when to release.

but not to call closed source code open source. call it closed source until released.

[jonnor]

FWIW the matter from the logs was valid and something to remember: Reading GPL code can taint a proprietary developer such that they can never implement functionality similar to what they read as proprietary without a risk to their employer. This has nothing to do with the source code getting tainted

What matter? There is nothing in the logs about GPL code? Are you suggesting that one should not release open source code, lest someone reads it and thus cannot reimplement it as propriatery code? Putting code out there does not force others to read it...

[nanonyme]

FWIW the matter from the logs was valid and something to remember: Reading GPL code can taint a proprietary developer such that they can never implement functionality similar to what they read as proprietary without a risk to their employer. This has nothing to do with the source code getting tainted

[nanonyme]

It is everybodys own priviledge to decide what code to write and when to release. I guess we all hope Luc eventually will release his source code and it will hopefully be usefull one way or the other.
No reason to bust each others chops.

Thank you for your contributions to the open source community until now!

Yes, sure, everyone can opensource their own work or not to, that's the author's right. MIT license in itself does not make code open unless you regard code that circulates within companies open. Then again, neither does GPL. GPL only forces giving code to end-user but not all code is meant to be used by everyone

[jonnor]

It is everybodys own priviledge to decide what code to write and when to release.

Of course. It is claiming something as "open source" when no source is available that is problematic.

From a prominent open source developer I'd expect not only that the code to be available when claiming open source, but also that work on it happens in the open.

[SystemCrasher]

Really strange guy.
1) He yells about money but ultimately forgot to provide reasonable ways to donate him (e.g. paypal button, Bitcoin address, etc). Even if there was bunch of people interested in libre ARM driver and they're willing to donate, he would never get donations because... er... it's almost impossible to do. And if someone really short on money, they can offer to do some work for some money on places like kickstarter. If I remember, someone like TArceri did it and it worked for some MESA features. But then you have to clearly explain what you're up to in ways people can understand it.
2) Then he yells about code ... without releasing it. Hmmph, really strange idea. It appears like if there is full channel of persons who can potetially help. Yet they can't since there is no code. I guess its wrong to blame #dri-devel people for being uncooperative and selfish, then?
3) Historically Lima driver had really strange goals and overall, its project management appears chaotic and completely random/hard to understand to me. With some weird goals I fail to understand. I can understand MESA driver. But some PoC stuff which only runs some Quake with some custom pre-compiled shaders? Err, that's what looks really odd to me. Then it's probably wrong to blame companies and contributors, no?

And hell, opensource is not about writing some polished cool shit and throwing it on our heads. Its all about cooperation and collaboration.

[Veto]

Take a breath guys...

It is everybodys own priviledge to decide what code to write and when to release. I guess we all hope Luc eventually will release his source code and it will hopefully be usefull one way or the other.
No reason to bust each others chops.

Thank you for your contributions to the open source community until now!

[airlied]

Oh, and obvious troll trolling obviously?

thanks for answering the question, you should just come out and say you want money for releasing the code, instead of making up bullshit excuses.

but until you are ready to release the code you should probably stop talking about it at open source conferences, since it isn't open source until you release it.