> hank wrote:
> > What I'm trying to propose is that assuming someday we have a working MAC
> > and Windows frontend, a manufacture can take our stuff, compile a backend
> > for their new scanner, put their name on it (with credit to us in the
> > about box) and ship drivers for all operating systems easially. If our
> > backend is good enough, it would save them significant effort, while also
> > giving them the ability to put "Network compatable" on the box.
> tahts what they can do today, the only thing they have to do is make their
> backend GPL!
> So where is the problem?
See the discussion on parrell port scanners, that happened today. (more
or less) Some companies belive they ahve done something specail that they
don't want to tell us about. They won't release a GPL backend. I'd like
a backend of some sort at least, even if it is under a less then ideal
license.
Remember we are dealing on several levels, there is a place for idealism,
but remember the real world is different. What it comes down to is
ultimatly, is where people want to take SANE. Where I would like to see
Sane go, is a eventially document the net part of it, submit it to the
IETF to become a RFC.
To do that, we need some support in the form of multipul implimentations
(I'm not sure exactly what is invloved, so I might not have the details
right) One way to encourage this is to get comercial venders to support
Sane.
The other thing I'd like to see Sane do is have lots of drivers for Unix.
We are close to a stanard for Unix (by default if nothing else, I'm not
aware of anything that supports as much as Sane) but we lack a lot of
drivers. Therefore I think we should consider the needs of the comercial
world with Sane. Again, this doen'st leave a perfect situation to the
license purists.
There are other ideas. Sane won't go away (and it might become what I
want it to do anyway, the spec is free) with a GNU license, but it will
discourage comercial devolpment, if big companies think they will be
forced to release information they consider private to support Sane.
A Gnu license does have advantages. Being distributed by teh Free
software foundation is one. Anouther is that we are not giving away our
work, letting unknowns modify it just enough that we are not compatable,
and putting their name on it. (if we can enfource that clause) There
are probably others.
In the end it comes down to the people who contributed. There are
advantages to everything, but if you didn't write the code you don't have
much a right to complain about the wrong decision. You can of course
comment on it, as I'm doing.
--
http://blugill.home.ml.org/
hank@black-hole.com
--
Source code, list archive, and docs: http://www.mostang.com/sane/
To unsubscribe: echo unsubscribe sane-devel | mail majordomo@mostang.com