Re: [PATCH v2] linux-firmware: brcm: Removed codeversion from firmware filenames.

["Henry Ptasinski" <henryp@broadcom.com>]

On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 02:23:49PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 11:07:53PM +0100, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
> > 2010/12/8 Henry Ptasinski <henryp@broadcom.com>:
> > > Second attempt at cleaning up firmware filenames.
> > >
> > > The basename-apiversion-codeversion construction for firmware filenames is not
> > > used by most other firmware files, adds complexity, and is not providing any
> > > value.  Renamed the firmware files using just basename-apiversion.  Also, fixed
> > > WHENCE to have correct path to brcmfmac files.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Henry Ptasinski <henryp@broadcom.com>
> > 
> > Henry, I believe we got report that Red Hat can not include your
> > firmware anyway because of licensing. Can you change license to some
> > common one which allows providing your firmware with distributions?
> 
> That's news to me, what specific licensing issue have you heard about
> here?  Last I saw, the issues were resolved and everyone could
> redistribute this firmware.

On a thread about other firmware, Dan Williams wrote:

> There's an existing Broadcom license in linux-firmware.git, and it *may*
> be OK, but it's really, really long and given that other major companies
> adopted the "shorter is better" approach, it's hard to believe that all
> the existing Broadcom license text is actually needed.

I'm not sure that translates to "can not include your firmware". Regardless, I
am trying to get our license simplified.  Obviously that's taking some time,
and I don't have any resolution yet, but I'll keep working on it.

- Henry