At Mon Mar 7, 2011 at 09:59:08, Jose Fonseca wrote: > First, I don't agree with a one-size-fits-all enable-patented flag at all. Would something like --enable-patented=floating,s3tc (with plain --enable- patented enabling all of it for those of us in jurisdictions without swpat) work for you?
At Mon Mar 7, 2011 at 09:59:08, Jose Fonseca wrote: > And I agree with Dave -- the current dynamic library approach is much > better. Well, except that floating can't be (easily) implemented using it, and if you are going to recompile mesa anyway... At Mon Mar 7, 2011 at 09:59:08, Jose Fonseca wrote: > So let's not put everything in the same basket, and focus on the issue at > hand, the floating point feature. Of course, this was intended for action after floating was merged. At Mon Mar 7, 2011 at 11:04:08, Dave Airlie wrote: > Not sure what country you are in (I'm guessing France) that doesn't > but the float patent texture is for hw/sw and isn't a swpat, so I'm > guessing EU law applies just as much. If the float patent isn't a swpat, why hide it behind --enable-patented at all? If it a hwpat only the hw can infringe, and a licence for the hw is presumably taken care of by the hw vendor. If Mesa (a pure sw product) is able to infringe on it, it is (at least partly) a swpat, and as such not valid/enforceable in most of the world (standard IANAL disclaimer applies). If the floating2 branch can be merged into master without an --enabled-patented switch the entire rationale for this patch series disappears (at least for now). Regards Jon Severinsson _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
