From alsa-devel-owner@alsa.jcu.cz  Sun Feb 28 13:49:19 1999
Received: from bologna.nettuno.it (bologna.nettuno.it [193.43.2.1])
	by marvin.jcu.cz (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA05103
	for <alsa-devel@alsa.jcu.cz>; Sun, 28 Feb 1999 13:47:44 +0100
Received: from igor.opun.it (ppp25-nas0.faenza.nettuno.it [193.207.49.154])
	by bologna.nettuno.it (8.8.6/8.8.6/NETTuno 3.1) with ESMTP id NAA09868;
	Sun, 28 Feb 1999 13:47:39 +0100 (MET)
Received: from racine.ra.it (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by igor.opun.it (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id NAA22206;
	Sun, 28 Feb 1999 13:46:41 +0100
Message-ID: <36D93AB1.102A10B3@racine.ra.it>
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 13:46:41 +0100
From: Abramo Bagnara <abbagnara@racine.ra.it>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: alsa-devel@alsa.jcu.cz
CC: Jaroslav Kysela <perex@jcu.cz>
Subject: Re: (SB Live) Free drivers or not? (fwd)
References: <Pine.LNX.3.96.990228104206.11253B-100000@entry.jcu.cz>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: alsa-devel@alsa.jcu.cz
Sender: alsa-devel-owner@alsa.jcu.cz
Precedence: list

Jaroslav Kysela wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
>         Here is the message from Richard Stallman. We discuss things about
> GNU GPL and ALSA. If I understand correctly:
> 
> ALSA would have to accept non-free code (modules) or to accept only GPL
> code (current status). The situation that Linus has given permission for
> non-free modules is for me new (but this allows probably existence of OSS
> commercial drivers). This also means that if we include ALSA driver to
> the official kernel, we won't possible to restrict to add a non-GPL code.
> I hate it.

I've the suspect that not all code included in the official kernel share the
same license (advansys.c, bsd_comp.c, ...)
I think that is perfectly plausible for ALSA to be included in official kernel,
also with different clauses (Linus agreeing, of course).

> 
> If my assumptions are well, there is only one way for future - to accept
> non-free kernel modules for ALSA code, too. I hope that I'm wrong with my
> assumptions or I hope that there must be also another way.

Actually Mr. Stallman doesn't seem to say that ALSA must follow Linux licensing
choices.
I think we can get quiet sleep, nobody but ALSA author will decide ALSA future.

Abramo

