Daniel Hazelton wrote:

quoted text
> If the OpenBSD developers want to attack the Linux Kernel community over

> patches that were *NEVER* *ACCEPTED* by said community, it should be just as

> fair for the Linux Kernel community to complain about those (unspecified)

> times where OpenBSD replaced the GPL on code with the BSD license.

>

> And, as said before, the place to take these complaints is the MadWifi

> discussion area, since they are, apparently, the only people that accepted

> the patches in question.

Although it's true the code is not yet upstream...
Given that we want support for Atheros (whenever all this mess is

sorted), I think it's quite fair to discuss these issues [in a calm,

rational, paranoia-free manner] on LKML or linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org.
> *WE*, the people on the Linux Kernel ML, *CANNOT* "fix the problem" with the

quoted text
> *MADWIFI* code having accepted patches which violate Reyk's copyright.

Given that we want it upstream, it is however relevant.  We want to make

sure we are aware of copyright problems, and we want to make sure any

copyright problems are fixed.
On a side note:  "MadWifi" does not really describe the Linux ath5k

driver, the driver at issue here.  Some mistakes were made by Linux

wireless developers, and those mistakes were corrected.
> Linux Kernel != FSF/GNU

quoted text
>

> If it was then RMS would not be attacking Linus and Linux with faulty claims

> just because Linus has publicly stated that the GPLv2 is a better license

> than v3

Amen.  100% agreed.
	Jeff