Re: generated source files, GPL and DFSG

[David Nusinow <david_nusinow@verizon.net>]

On Fri, Jul 22, 2005 at 11:28:54PM -0700, Michael K. Edwards wrote:
> On 7/22/05, Glenn Maynard <glenn@zewt.org> wrote:
> > In other words, we'll take something as source that we know isn't,
> > because we like nVidia.  ...
> 
> Hey, I didn't say I liked the idea myself.  I'm just calling it like I
> see it.  I would say that the core functionality of the nv driver is
> not maintainable or improvable by anyone outside nVidia, but at least
> it can be recompiled to pick up changes in X.org data structure layout
> or whatever and there is some chance of point fixing it.  It's not
> entirely my idea of source code -- but then neither are the Emacs
> internals.

This is true, but not because the driver isn't commented. It's because the
specs for the card have not been released, and as such we don't know what
the magic numbers mean. The hardware specs are entirely external to the
source code for the driver itself, and as such it doesn't affect the
freeness of the driver.

On a more practical note, you're going to have a very difficult time
convincing me to move the nv driver to non-free. This not even borderline
case is the only thing that stands in the way of having every single nvidia
owner use the binary nvidia drivers which I can not support in *any way at
all*.

 - David Nusinow