Hi, On Thu, Jan 24, 2008 at 02:18:44PM -0500, Karim Yaghmour wrote: > The basic fact is that they do publish source for their drivers at > viaarena.com and the X server part of that source is licensed under the > original MIT license. Hence, there's nothing precluding you from taking > that code, vetting it and pushing it up to the xorg folks.
There's also this: http://www.alittletooquiet.net/text/a-license-for-the-via-vt6656-linux-driver/ In other words, VIA publishes the source for *some* drivers, and publishes reasonable licenses for only some of those. Then there's also XvMC support in the way of a custom version of mplayer. This, of course, isn't useful to anybody that's interested in keeping their software up-to-date, or anybody that's interested in using a different video player. In fact, in practice, it's useful to very few people at all. XvMC support belongs in the driver, and in a library, so all of the different players can use it. Why do they waste development dollars on projects that aren't of any value to the open-source community? They could be getting some pay-off from these investments, but they choose not to (it would seem). > You've got plenty of raw talent, but there's a disconnect between those > manufacturers and the open source world. You bet there's a disconnect. > The problem of course is that nobody should be doing this other than VIA. Why? -Forest -- Forest Bond http://www.alittletooquiet.net
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ openchrome-users mailing list [email protected] http://wiki.openchrome.org/mailman/listinfo/openchrome-users Main page: http://www.openchrome.org Wiki: http://wiki.openchrome.org User Forum: http://wiki.openchrome.org/tikiwiki/tiki-view_forum.php?forumId=1
