READING COMPREHENSION IS KEY.
Meanwhile past the world of gaming Linux has long enjoyed a strong position in 3D/SFX where it entered the pipelines as render clusters but has now progressed to support the entire pipeline which is why 3d content software like Mudbox, Maya etc have Linux versions. If graphic performance was 'bad' as you try to paint it, this would never have happened as these programs really rely on gpu performance.
But of course the BIG thing is that discrete GPU's are becoming obsolete for the end user desktop in favour of GPGPU solutions like Intel's which is fully open source and thus can tap right into the kernel driver infrastructure and take advantage of what it offers. This means that your -'graphics evolve past their ability to catch up' statement is just bull.
As I see it Linux has never been in a better position in terms of graphics, there's a new display server coming in the form of Wayland, Valve is working with hardware graphics vendors to increase Linux performance for gaming, discrete GPU's which has been a sore point in terms of open drivers are being obsoleted on the desktop in favour of open source GPGPU solutions, and for those who are using discrete graphics there are both official proprietary offerings AND open source offerings.
As it is now, the kernel developers offers the following incentive for open sourcing your drivers, once in the tree they will maintain it against changes in the internal interfaces thus making use of new functionality and even fix bugs as we find them. The price is to open source so that it can be shipped as part of the kernel.
NVidia refuses and so they maintain their proprietary out-of-tree driver which re-implements functionality they would have gotten for free if they would open source the driver. That is their choice and noone says they can't do so, however now they want to make use of existing kernel solutions rather than writing their own as they've done sofar, of course without open sourcing their driver. Obviously the kernel devs will disagree as the whole point is that proprietary blobs is a nuisance at best, and a raging security/stability hole at worst from the perspective of the kernel devs, and as such they sure don't want to make it more comfortable to maintain binary blobs against the kernel.
If you look more a bit more closely, you will notice that the kernel developers' goals are vastly different from what you think they are. They want to build the best kernel possible. Everybody who wants to contribute is welcome to submit patches. Some will be accepted, others rejected, names called, and so on. In the end, the kernel will be better and/or people will have learned from the experience. However, companies that provide only binary drivers do nothing to advance the Linux kernel. Some kernel developers consider binary drivers a violation of their copyright even.
Cooperating with proprietary vendors gives the Linux kernel developers nothing in return, just letting others exploit their work for free without giving anything back.
Fuck you nvidia, I'm so glad Linux developers are giving you a hard time, I hope secure boot will also give you a hard time. Just realize how lost you are here. Release specs or GTFO already.
Well, I think a working Optimus implementation based on the Nouvea driver should be possible, even if Nvidia itself would not cooperate.
If the result will give any performance gains (given the early state of recent-hardware hardware support in Nouveau) over just using the Intel GPU is another question. :)
The Linux dev's are giving USERS a hard time. They are deprieving USERS of the ability and chioce to use thier system how they want. Alan is deciding for us all becuase he has a bone to pick, while SCREAMING GPL and Freedom! Instead its Alan really saying "its my code, fuck everyone else, I'm the decider".
Someone should just fork his code as LGPL, and merge it in the kernel with the title, for "USE with Prop. Drivers Only", solving the problem, and dening him the power to push twisted viewpoint of "freedom" on us.
If its his code, and he won't let anyone touch it, then we'll use the GPL to against him, and show him its OUR code.
Yea, I also think that there is no reason to make an exception for NVIDIA. It will slow things down for them, but they should have known it would be the case from the get-go (and it seems that they did, since they wanted the license changed). Of course, open-sourcing their blob is not an option, but helping out nouveau is something they could do. In that case everyone would win.
And, uh, if it's his code, he is the decider. And he decided on a license. And the license states that it can't be used with proprietary software. There is nothing that anyone can do about that. Also, I don't think GPL allows relicensing things with a less strict license. And even if it did, well, good luck maintaining the whole relicensed kernel!