On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 12:25 PM, Ben Barrett <[email protected]> wrote:
> Sounds cool, but does this smell like StarOffice & Sun, to anyone else??
> WebKit is good, though -- just wondering whether this is really a case
> of open source benefiting from proprietary code, or vice versa...

I'm wary of it. I think there's that kind of danger any time you have
folks answering to stockholders in the code stewardship role on an
open source project whose code base plays the crippleware role to a
proprietary product.

OTOH, the Chromium-unique code is BSD-licensed, so no legal barriers
to recycling the code under other licenses such as the Gnu licenses.
But note that Chromium comes with some third party code issued under
other licenses. <http://code.google.com/chromium/terms.html#3rdparty>.
The ones  I'm familiar with pose no barrier to recycling under other
licenses as I recall, but there are a couple that I haven't studied.

I haven't investigated the Chromium Project in depth. But my nose
tells me to be more interested long term in what KDE does in regard to
WebKit. They've been contributing WebKit patches and there were some
rumbles awhile back that KDE is moving toward deprecating KHTML in
favor of WebKit. I haven't checked to see if that's true.

There's no crippleware business model and no vendor brutally
controlling the KDE code base that I know of. :-) So I'm guessing that
a KDE branch might be the WebKit wagon that winds up with the FOSS
Clydesdale hitched to it. But that's only a guess. Time will tell.

Best regards,

Paul


-- 
Universal Interoperability Council
<http:www.universal-interop-council.org>
_______________________________________________
EUGLUG mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.euglug.org/mailman/listinfo/euglug

Reply via email to