back to list| Mailing List os2-wireless_users@2rosenthals.com Archived Message #5765 |
back to list |
|
|---|
Hey Lewis,<snip>
The impression we (*I*, as I should not presume to speak for others on either list) get from Thorolf is that Willibald is not of a mind to make the project open. Every time this is suggested, the answer comes back that he alone has purview over the code, that there are legality issues, and I get the distinct impression that outside assistance is just not welcome.As we
found ourselves in the situation with Jens, when *one* person is
responsible for the development of a single piece of very important
software, there is *always* the opportunity for something to go awry.
This is not much comparable with Genmac. Tthe sources from Jens are closed
source and definitely never will go open source, as they are owned by
others. Genmac is not yet open source in terms of existing with an open
accessible source archive, but I have very good reason to not consider it
being closed source like the sources of Jens. As I see it, having it truly
open source is a question of time and priority, so from the standpoint of
netlabs.org there is no reason to think tht one day the project will just
shut down and the source is not available then.
But I'm not interested in asking Netlabs about GenMAC. I proposed a completely different project, not necessarily hosted or overseen by Netlabs at all.My statements concerning the state of the project were not directed
toward the development of the driver, but rather, the closed source.
Understood. This is why it makes sense to ask netlabs.org if the project
is really closed source or not. If not, the discussion may not be
required.
I agree.We have a problem here tht I am trying to open for discussion. GenMAC is
Willibald's project, and he may do with it as he wishes.
netlabs.org is the reason that this driver has grown to more than just a
technology study.
From my eyes the cooperation between Willibald Meyer andThat is not the impression I get from reading the GenMAC user mailing list or anything else. I'll take your word for it, though.
netlabs.org, for this and much more projects, is that tight that the
things Willibald wishes to do with the project for the last two years are
more than welcome for netlabs.org, and likely all of us.
But is GenMAC's approach modular enough to accommodate an ever-changing field of hardware devices without requiring constant manual intervention? And there is still the issue of bundling proprietary Win32 drivers, which is a concern for any open source project.That doesn't negate the
pressing need for more than one developer to have full access to source
and to be able to contribute talent to the project.
I very much second the aim to make it open source. It took quite some
time, but meanwhile Willibald himself thinks that way and is willing to do
so. During that time I think I addressed this towards Adrian whenever we
spoke about Genmac, so in fact I am very much of your opinion. As I see
that we finally convinced Willibald, I don't see a reason to create a
second project, but make sure that Genmac finally goes OpenSource.
About the contribution of talents: I would say that only a handful ofI personally contributed $500 USD to the development of the Intel 3945ABG driver. Funding is not an issue; results are. Willibald can't be the *only* person in the *world* able to do this type of coding. If that is true, then if something happens to his schedule (or to him, g-d forbid), the entire project hangs. It might be a better use of his time and talents to teach others to do the work!
persons is able to code on that level, and only one person has time for
doing so. Making something OpenSource won't help much here, as many
OpenSource Projects have shown that they do well only if they are funded.
Unless that comes true, I expect that not much will change. Nevertheless
the step to OpenSource must come.
I didn't intend for it to have anything to do with GenMAC. I intended it simply as the subject suggests: a proposal to discuss an alternative driver project. Already, Adrian has responded to my follow-up, and the mis-communication continues. I can't even re-enter the discussion there, because now, my entire credibility has been brought into question, simply due to the language barrier.This is *my* thread, on *my* list. Please keep it here.
Didn't mean to steal it from you ;-) Please understand my wish as a try to
make every thought about this discussion available also to the people
working on Genmac. If I wouldnt have read it, Adrian may have never or
only later known that such a discussion is underway. And not taking into
account that Genmac's situation is much better that being thought of by
users, does not help anybody.
In order to spread the word, I will suggest to add this specificGood luck... From where I sit, no matter how much discussion occurs along those lines, nothing will change until Willibald decides it should, and that is *entirely* his decision to make. Until then, we're just chewing the fat and not getting anywhere. That's not a complaint; it's a statement of fact. Again, it's Willibald's driver, it's his project, and it's his decision. He could even patent the wrapper technology he has developed, and then we're all up a creek without a paddle. And if he takes my comments out of context, he may just decide to do that, and then I really have been made out to be the bad guy, even though my question was an innocent one.
OpenSource topic to a session about Genmac, being planned for Warpstock
Europe for November this year. Of course the presentation will be
available afterwards.
|
Subscribe: Feed,
Digest,
Index. Unsubscribe Mail to ListMaster |