Hello!
I'm the author of the free hardware driver layer for wireless Atheros

devices in OpenBSD, also known as "OpenHAL".
I'm still trying to get an idea about the facts and the latest state

of the incidence that violated the copyright of my code, because I

just returned from vacation.
I'm very disappointed about this and I hope that it was a mistake,

because it is very unfair and malicious against me and the OpenBSD

community. I invested a lot of time to write the code and to make it

work with as many chipsets as possible. And during the last years, the

OpenBSD community helped to test and to improve the driver. I always

liked the idea to port it to other operating systems, but now somebody

harmed these efforts by violating the license.
Some time ago, I got repeated requests to change the license of the

code to GPL or to dual-license it but I always rejected these

requests. I clearly explained my reasons against dual-licensing in the

past. It needed some time, but it had seemed to me that the involved

people had finally accepted my decision. 
I do like to idea to port the free Atheros driver to other operating

systems in addition to OpenBSD, because it is a clear sign against

hardware companies attacking the free software "community" by

releasing binary-only driver objects instead of free code or hardware

documentation. I used to cooperate with the people working on the

madwifi port of "OpenHAL"; we exchanged ideas, bug fixes, and small

code snippets.  They sent me some bug reports and I also looked at

their changes and reported some functional problems. This was possible

because they kept the license in place. 
But now the Linux code is almost ready and somebody wants to cancel

any options to cooperate by locking me out with a prepended GPL and an

invalid copyright on top of it. I hope that this was not caused by the

same people.
Nevertheless, I'm cross-posting this mail to some lists and people

because I don't know the responsible persons. I have too many mails

ab...
[ message continues ]

It has never been applied to any repository.
No.

-

Well that is not accurate. Please give us a few we are working on
Same here. Apologies for this taking so long. It'll all be sorted out soon.
  Luis

-

I'm still waiting for an answer. Your process is taking too long.
Reyk

-

Speaking as a person through which these changes flow upstream into the

official kernel (ath5k maintainers -> linville -> me -> linus)...
The most important thing for today is that no ath5k stuff has been

committed (nor has it ever been).
I would rather take it slow and make sure everybody is happy.  There is

nothing upstream, and so, there is no need to rush and correct something.
Collectively, this is just growing pains.  Everyone is breaking new

ground, trying to figure out how to best support atheros stuff on Linux.

  There are new tools to deal with (svn? git? flavor of the day?:)), new

licenses with new ramifications to consider, a new wireless stack to

deal with.
What you are witnessing is but a small part of the chaos as everyone

tackles these chores simultaneously.
	Jeff
-