Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The *relevant* claim I have made is that it is > inappropriate to use our GR mechanism to attempt to *decide* whether GPLed > drivers cause a distribution problem. The release team, the ftp team, and I > suspect even most of the kernel team have no interest in a GR that > authorizes any distribution of software which it at the same time asserts is > illegal.
Thank you for making this claim public on this list (where it belongs). I think it's an important point, and if you've already said this to Sven some time ago in a different medium, then I understand the reactions of some people towards him. > I have previously given my own understanding of why it is not a problem for > us to distribute GPLed firmware blobs pending license clarifications, but I > don't see any indication that Sven is interested in understanding that POV, > only in tilting at strawmen; so I don't intend to lose any more time on > discussing this point beyond this single clarification email. It has already clarified much, and since I personally trust you, I don't insist on your repeating the explanation. However, I'd like to point out that other people are trying to follow this discussion, too. I don't think that your previous explanation was posted to -vote, which IMHO is the relevant list for such discussions. I feel it's particularly hard this time to follow the discussion; with no other GR have there been so many "this has been said elsewhere" (where? IRC?) statements by so many people, without trying to sum up on a web page or similar. Regards, Frank -- Frank Küster Single Molecule Spectroscopy, Protein Folding @ Inst. f. Biochemie, Univ. Zürich Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
