On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 9:03 AM, Marc Jones marcj303@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 9:44 AM Alex G. mr.nuke.me@gmail.com wrote:
On 10/29/2015 09:48 AM, Marc Jones wrote:
Hello coreboot,
Hi Marc
Please limit comments to specific items in this version. If you have additions for the next version (if needed), the draft document is open for comment.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1wMdDUAZR2Z9V7hcs3IhIOqw6sYQxb3vPEmbITTCr...
That looks pretty good. I think you've done a great job of clarifying the requirements of ISA vs non-ISA blobs compared to the last version. I've made some comments on it to ask for clarification about the versioning requirements.
While not necessarily specific to this version, are we still considering forbidding "no-reverse engineering" and "no-modification" clauses for blobs?
Thanks, I think it is all open for discussion and could go in the next version. It might be a good idea, but that might be too limiting and we would have to remove all blobs and they would be hosted somewhere else, which defeates the utility of the blobs dir. We would like intel to push to blobs/ but I think that would be a huge blocker for them.
+1. It's tough enough for us to get rid of a few lines of GPL boilerplate. Getting companies to significantly change their boilerplate licensing for blobs will be a blocker.
Just treat them as we always have.
-
David Hendricks