Christian Schoenebeck wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, 24. Januar 2008 23:08:05 schrieben Sie:
> And btw, you were the one who just called us not being part of the open source
> community, just because we contributed to one software that has that license
> restriction you dont like, ignoring the fact that we contributed to other
> projects as well. How do you call that? Not "misleading"? However you call
> it, I call it "unfair".
Christian (and other LS dev's),
It's your work, and you do whatever you want with it. No need to defend
yourself (yet another time) IMHO.
Personally I have similar reservations regarding the code I write for
FFADO. If one or the other hardware vendor decides to use it as (part
of) the software platform for (part of) it's hardware I wouldn't like
it. There are numerous scenario's in which a hardware system can use
open source components without being completely open-source, and still
be in line with the GPL. And if the open-source code makes up a
significant part of the base functionality of the product, I feel that
the authors deserve something in return.
When writing things that are 'middleware', these issues are more
pronounced IMHO. I consider the LS engine to be such a 'middleware'
application, since all it takes for a vendor to build a product out of
it is a compiler for their target platform. If they were to use a closed
operating system, people wouldn't even be able to exercise their GPL
rights, even if the 'open' source code was shipped along. We could have
an endless discussion on this, so please let's not do so. In a 100%
honest world this would be a non-issue, but I'm not that naive.
Keep up the good work, I think you're doing really cool stuff.
Greets,
Pieter
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Received on Fri Jan 25 12:15:06 2008
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Jan 25 2008 - 12:15:06 EET