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

Marc Boucher
2004-04-30T02:15:29Z

Dear Sean,

On Apr 29, 2004, at 7:55 PM, Sean Estabrooks wrote:
>
> Perhaps others on this list are getting as tired as I am of your using
> the term "religious bias" as a negative connotation against people who
> support and protect the open source nature of Linux. Maybe you could
> at least pretend to respect the people who you supposedly apologized
> to.

I not only highly respect Rusty but have closely worked and been
friends with him for several years. The same applies to several other
kernel developers.

Please don't get me wrong. We are entirely for the open-source nature
of Linux, and I have been personally contributing for the last 15 years
to many open-source projects (for examples, see the AUTHORS section of
"man iptables", or search google for my previous email addresses
marc@mbsi.ca & marc@cam.org to get more historical background).

However we also believe that pragmatically bringing in support for key
hardware (which currently cannot otherwise be easily handled in the
traditional open-source approach) will benefit Linux, help it gain even
more usefulness/acceptance, and make larger numbers of exposed people
realize the natural advantages of open-source, then become
contributors. On the other hand, forcing open-source down throats with
impractical "tainting" schemes, scare tactics or other coercive methods
may achieve the opposite effect or turn Linux into just an
ideological/political movement rather than the ubiquitous operating
system it deserves to be.

Sincerely
Marc

--
Marc Boucher
Linuxant inc.