On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 9:03 AM, Marc Jones <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 9:44 AM Alex G. <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 10/29/2015 09:48 AM, Marc Jones wrote: >> > Hello coreboot, >> >> Hi Marc >> >> > Please limit comments to specific items in this version. If you have >> > additions for the next version (if needed), the draft document is open >> > for comment. >> > >> > >> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1wMdDUAZR2Z9V7hcs3IhIOqw6sYQxb3vPEmbITTCrOwU/edit?usp=sharing >> >> That looks pretty good. I think you've done a great job of clarifying >> the requirements of ISA vs non-ISA blobs compared to the last version. >> I've made some comments on it to ask for clarification about the >> versioning requirements. >> >> While not necessarily specific to this version, are we still considering >> forbidding "no-reverse engineering" and "no-modification" clauses for >> blobs? >> >> > Thanks, I think it is all open for discussion and could go in the next > version. It might be a good idea, but that might be too limiting and we > would have to remove all blobs and they would be hosted somewhere else, > which defeates the utility of the blobs dir. We would like intel to push to > blobs/ but I think that would be a huge blocker for them. > +1. It's tough enough for us to get rid of a few lines of GPL boilerplate. Getting companies to significantly change their boilerplate licensing for blobs will be a blocker. Just treat them as we always have. -- David Hendricks (dhendrix) Systems Software Engineer, Google Inc.
-- coreboot mailing list: [email protected] http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
