I don't understand the rationale for this change. It is obvious that many people and a lot of software rely on OSS. The logical route to go about this would be to develop an OSS wrapper first (OSSp or whatever), and after it works to some degree, replace the OSS kernel stuff with it. Doing it the other way around is just asking for trouble.
What's wrong with blacklisting the OSS modules, but still shipping them with the kernel? So people who need OSS can enable it with minimal effort, while it's still disabled by default.
I don't understand the rationale for this change. It is obvious that many people and a lot of software rely on OSS. The logical route to go about this would be to develop an OSS wrapper first (OSSp or whatever), and after it works to some degree, replace the OSS kernel stuff with it. Doing it the other way around is just asking for trouble.
What's wrong with blacklisting the OSS modules, but still shipping them with the kernel? So people who need OSS can enable it with minimal effort, while it's still disabled by default.