Re: [PATCH] Blacklist binary-only modules lying about their license

Timothy Miller
2004-04-28T19:24:51Z

Marc Boucher wrote:
>

>
> In an enterprise, customers always come first. Nonetheless, I don't
> believe that this issue had a significant impact on kernel developers.
> Had their support burden been significantly increased by our products,
> the issue would have come up much sooner.
>

This has all deteriorated into childish bickering rather than meaningful
debate.

The problem is that Linuxant or whoever has done something which is
misleading and violates a tenet of the GPL and the module interface of
the Linux kernel.

There may be technical reasons which excuse this, but in the end,
Linuxant needs to correct their (unintentional) error and move on. In
this society, if you violate copyright and get caught, you get slammed.
You've been caught and slammed. Fortunately, no one is suing you over
it.

But spending your time arguing about it rather than making it right is
only making you look like a jerk. At this point, no one cares about
your excuses for why you did it -- excuses accepted, technical reasons
understood, we don't blame you for what you did in the PAST.

If I were in your position, I would say, "I'm sorry. I understand the
problem, and I will fix it as soon as possible." THAT would be a
professional and ethical thing to do. It's also a good way to get on
the GOOD side of the Linux community. Everyone makes mistakes; what
matters is how they DEAL with those mistakes.