From: Sengan Baring-Gould <sengan@seqnet.net>
  To  : ggi-develop@eskimo.com
  Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1998 20:25:14 -0600

I'm back

Hi folks,

For those of you who don't know me, I work for Cyrix Corporation
and basically "engineered" that Emmanuel could write and then release
the Media GX driver. I also helped a little, but no coding as of yet.

I'm back, from a fun Phd  viva... spare you the details, but basically
the
examinors want all the stuff my supervisor told me to put in out again,
and more reasonning (which my Phd supervisor told me explicitely not
to do). So I'm sort of busy on that (AGAIN... :-(((()

I had a chat with Alan Cox about his forray into Media GX land. As
Emmanuel said, no worries: he's learning about fbcon, and he likes the
KGI driver.

Licensing: I'd like to see us supporting *BSD. In fact I don't even care

if our drivers end up in someone's game running on DOS. The real
question
is DO WE WANT KGI TO BE THE STANDARD? I think we do, but this
requires us to be very open:

* We are linking into other's kernels, which is the major piece of work
of the 2.
* We'll never convince commercial Unixes to use our driver model unless
   they can use us without GPL
* Xfree is working very well. They are free as hell. We need eventually
to
   co-opt some of those guys to improve our driver base
* Somehow on this one, I doubt too many people have to gain by keeping
their own
   modified copies of drivers: it's a lot of effort, and what does it
really achieve.

Don't say I don't believe in the GPL. I got Cyrix to agree with it for
the Media GX
driver. I believe in it very strongly, but on this one issue I think we
need all the help
we can get, and muster all the influence we can.

So I suggest: the strongest non-commercial license for whatever it is
linked to.
* for Linux GPL (tradition, and the kernel is GPL'd),
* BSD: BSD license
* For anything else Xfree like license except a statement that this
product uses
   KGI technology (www.ggi-project.org)

Comments?

Sengan