On Tuesday 23 June 2009 15:26:35 Scott Wood wrote: > On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 06:33:53PM +0200, Detlev Zundel wrote: > > Apart from the the above reasons, currently most people who voiced their > > opinion (not too many right now) oppose the move. The reasoning seems > > to be that companies using U-Boot inside a commercial product consider > > it to be "a neccessary precondition to only accept blessed firmware > > upgrades" (my wording). What motivates this argument is not completely > > clear to me. Maybe it is fear of being liable as a product vendor to > > faulty sw upgrades. > > Regardless of what motivates it, people who sell hardware to such > customers (and who also contribute to u-boot) may not want to risk losing > that business by pushing GPLv3 on them.
indeed. expecting businesses to push other peoples' agenda isnt realistic, especially when the conversation is pretty much a net customer loss for said businesses. customers arent going to appear because your business is now pushing GPLv3 instead of GPLv2, but they will certainly disappear. -mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
