On 21/11/2007, mahasamoot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I get the feeling that some of the people complaining about Solaris not being > under the GPL are simply using the licensing as an excuse. I don't think the > licensing is as big of an obstacle as they make it out to be.
I can't speak for others, however, for me, basically the only reason I'm not currently using nexenta over debian & ubuntu is the licence. If solaris was dual licenced with GPLv3 I would use it over Linux >For some in the Linux community, I think the real issue is that Solaris is not >Linux -- it's not their baby. This is true; many will say " I have a working kernel" tell me why I should switch to solaris citing various hardware/driver problems etc. However, at the moment there is an obvious reason not to use solaris under CDDL. The CDDL is not a Free Software Foundation as defined by the FSF, the organisation which supported GNU, which if you remember is the system which Nexenta uses to build upon the Open Solaris kernel to provide a full POSIX system. For most, the FSF is the gold standard; getting a licence through the OSI is not too tricky - Microsoft has done it, getting it through the FSF is soemthing to _really_ be proud of. -my two penneth- -- www.dobo.urandom.co.uk ---- If each of us have one object, and we exchange them, then each of us still has one object. If each of us have one idea, and we exchange them, then each of us now has two ideas. - George Bernard Shaw _______________________________________________ gnusol-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/gnusol-users
