Ubuntu reaches out to embarrassed SuSE devs

[Steffen Kluge]

On 27/11/2006, at 3:49 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> Well, thanks to google, you can still find something closer to
> what he really meant back when he wrote it.  Here is an excerpt
> from an interview circa 1998:
>
>   "The reason I accept binary-only modules at all is that in many
>   cases you have for example a device driver that is not written for
>   Linux at all, but for example works on SCO Unix or other operating
>   systems, and the manufacturer suddenly wakes up and notices that
>   Linux has a larger audience than the other groups. And as a result
>   he wants to port that driver to Linux.
>
>   But because that driver was obviously not _derived_ from Linux (it
>   had a life of its own regardless of any Linux development), I
>   didn't feel that I had the moral right to require that it be put
>   under the GPL, so the binary-only module interface allows those
>   kinds of modules to exist and work with Linux."
>
> I don't see much room for doubt about his intent then or any
> reason to question that moral judgement.

Linus, like everybody, is entitled to an opinion and has the right
to voice it. He may or may not find binary-only modules acceptable,
but this has no bearing whatsoever on the licensing terms of code
released under the GPL.

Cheers
Steffen.