Re: [PATCH 0/1] Embedded Maintainer(s), linux-embedded@vger list

[James Chapman <jchapman@katalix.com>]

Daniel THOMPSON wrote:
> James Chapman wrote:
>> Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 5:53 PM, Tim Bird wrote:
>>>> Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>>>>> Er, is that GPL or LGPL code that you're modifying? If so, you
>>>>>> *have* to
>>>>>> push those code changes out (make them available to others),
>>>>>> whether you
>>>>>> think people will be interested or not!
>>>>> umm, not really.  only if (1) he gives a binary to someone and (2)
>>>>> they ask him for the source.  if he doesnt distribute or no one asks,
>>>>> he doesnt have to do squat.
>>>> This is closer to correct, but missing some important details.
>>>>
>>>> Start the GPL compliance tutorial/flameware in 3, 2, 1...
>>> yeah, i really dont think licensing things belong here.  sorry for
>>> following up.
>>>
>>> how about this policy: if you want to make a statement, go pay a
>>> lawyer.  but that statement still shouldnt be made here ;).
>>> -mike
>> Sorry, I didn't mean to provoke a GPL flame war. The point I was trying
>> to make (badly as it turns out) is that if a company really wants to see
>> its changes taken upstream, it could simply publish the work on its
>> website and let each relevant community know that it's there.
> 
> Isn't this a lot of the problem with the way embedded companies and
> developers interact with upstream.
> 
> In some cases it is in the embedded developers interests to see their
> code adopted upstream (i.e. so they don't have to maintain it).

Totally agree! And the best chance of having code accepted upstream is 
to work with the community _while_ developing it, i.e. discussing the 
code during implementation, rather than presenting it to the community 
when it's done. All too often, companies get frustrated by feedback from 
the community because changes are requested to code that the original 
authors have spent time testing etc. Had early versions been submitted 
for feedback, changes could be made with less chance of wasted effort.

> Just tossing some code over the wall will, in almost all circumstances,
> result in the code being ignored.

It depends. But it stands a better chance of being adopted than holding 
on to the work until someone asks for it. There could be lots of 
embedded developers out there who would be willing to take some code 
from cisco, modify it and work with the community to have it adopted 
upstream.


-- 
James Chapman
Katalix Systems Ltd
http://www.katalix.com
Catalysts for your Embedded Linux software development