Awhile ago there was a brief discussion concerning the UDI
specification.
The below URL and brief quote are of interest to the Linux
Community and kernel developers. Please pay special notice to
the title of this report.
"IT Week: Intel looks to Linux community for help with UDI"
http://www.zdnet.co.uk/news/1998/37/ns-5501.html
<Begin Quote>
However, writing new drivers for the thousands of peripherals
on the market is a daunting task. Hence, Project UDI is hoping
the Linux community will help. Linux will be, said Quick, key to
the adoption of the UDI initiative. A reference platform will be
distibributed as freeware for Linux, and the Project UDI members
will be counting on the Linux community to work on device drivers.
"We have talked to Linus Torvalds (the creator of Linux) and he
was very interested in the idea," Intel's Demshki said.
"The advantage of releasing to the Linux community is that
their work will give Unix OS vendors a basis to work from,"
Quick added, though he stressed that the specification will
still be tightly controlled and standards based.
<End Quote>
After reading this report several I continued to find several
"Red Flags" concerning Commericial UNIX vendors, Intel, and
the Linux Community.
1. The reference platform that is discussed in the report, while
it does state that it will be released as "freeware" to the Linux
Community it does not explicitly state that it will be GNU GPL'ed.
2. I raised this question in the first discussion of UDI on this
mailing list. There is no way that UDI drivers which are
GNU GPL'ed can be used in Commercial UNIX distributions unless the
original authors release the source code under two very different
software licenses. Given the responses I received from the original
discussion this seems extremely remote.
3. The last paragraph raises many questions, one of which that comes
to mind is similar to what the Apache folks did.
a. What is in this for the Linux Community?
b. What is the "currency" of trade in this scenario?
1. Source code from the commercial vendors?
2. Hardware from the commercial vendors?
c. Where do the peripheral vendors fit into this scenario?
1. They give the Linux Community the hardware?
2. They give the Linux Community all needed/wanted/required
documentation?
d. Where do the Chip set vendors fit into this scenario?
1. SCSI chip sets.
2. Video Chip sets.
3. Sound Chip sets.
4. Micro-controllers for USB & Firewire.
4. Would Linux International act as the "legal entity" for
this scenario?
5. Where do RedHat, Caldera, S.U.S.E., Slackware, MkLinux, etc
fit into to this scenario?
a. They develop the UDI drivers in-house and release them
under the two different licenses?
b. ???
6. What changes would be required for the Linux Kernel to accommadate
the inclusion of UDI drivers?
7. Is the Linux Community willing to place the specifications
for device drivers into the hands of an "outside" committee?
8. Last but not least who will be the spokesperson for the Linux
Community in this matter?
a. Jon "Maddog" Hall?
b. Eric Raymond?
c. Linus Torvalds?
d. Richard M. Stallman? (Yes I am serious)
e. Alan Cox?
f. A Committee with members from the list above?
g. player to be named later?
h. none of the above?
This report, if accurate, seems to generate many legal questions
for all involved parties, most of which do not have a simple answer.
At this point I can not say that I am for it or against it. There
is way to much that is unknown yet to make an informed decision one
way or the other.
-- Terry L. Ridder Blue Danube Software (Blaue Donau Software) "We do not write software, we compose it."entertaining angels by the light of my computer screen 24-7 you wait for me entertaining angels while the night becomes history host of heaven, sing over me ==Entertaining Angels==Newsboys
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/