Re: incorrect taint of ndiswrapper

David Weinehall
2006-10-26T03:23:58Z

On Wed, Oct 25, 2006 at 11:58:38PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> Ar Mer, 2006-10-25 am 23:33 +0200, ysgrifennodd David Weinehall:
> > Personally I feel that no matter if they are legal or not, we should not
> > cater to such drivers in the first place. If it's trickier to use
> > Windows API-drivers under Linux than to write a native Linux driver,
> > big deal... We don't want Windows-drivers. We want native drivers.
>
> Neither taint nor _GPL are intended to stop people doing things that, in
> the eyes of the masses, are stupid. The taint mark is there to ensure
> that they don't harm the rest of us. The FSF view of freedom is freedom
> to modify not freedom to modify in a manner approved by some defining
> body.

Hence my use of the world "Personally". It's my own opinion that we
shouldn't support Windows API-drivers. I don't think this has anything
to do with the FSF view on freedom. This has to do with the freedom to
make a sound technical decision.

Regards: David
--
/) David Weinehall <tao@acc.umu.se> /) Northern lights wander (\
// Maintainer of the v2.0 kernel // Dance across the winter sky //
\) http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/ (/ Full colour fire (/