Shawn Walker a ?crit : > I don't mean to belittle those who believe this, but it only matters > to some individuals. > > There are greatly differing views even among "FOSS enthusiasts" as to > what is acceptably FOSS and what is not. > > That's why distributions such as "Gnewsense" exist. > > The important thing to remember here is that there are very few > components that don't have the source code available, and it is > completely within the community's power to solve these issues.
I mostly agree. I think the matter is only for Sun to be entirely clear about which licensing apply where, and duly respect the constraints of all licenses (which I think they do, though maybe some more clarity is needed). >From reading the thread on ilug, it seems to me that part of the misconception is (again...) because of the confusion between OpenSolaris the project, which contains only FOSS code (CDDL, GPL, MIT, etc), and OpenSolaris the distribution, which has some proprietary binaries. We'll have to explain that again and again. I still think Sun underestimates how much that matter for a very vocal minority of FOSS users. However, I'm not sure how the community can fix issues specific to OpenSolaris the distro, which is under Sun control AFAICT, and which was the main topic of the discussion. The choices made there (such as the integration of the nVidia drivers) are not made by the community, right? If they decide to keep those bits in for the sake of user-friendliness (and that's a very good reason in my eyes), then OpenSolaris the distro won't ever be considered FOSS, and we'll have to contend again and again with those discussions. Laurent -- / Leader de Projet & Communaut? | I'm working, but not speaking for \ G11N http://fr.opensolaris.org | Bull Services http://www.bull.com / FOSUG http://guses.org |
