So, Evan Powell thinks that the CDDL says that all modifications must
be contributed back to the original source of covered software. I
would like someone to point to me where it says that. It does say that
modifications of covered software must be made available in source
code format, but I don't see anything about a requirement to resubmit
the mods to the community from whence it came.
I don't see the problem here. Eric says that most of the changes will
be integrated into the gate. Evan seems to be reasonable about the
time required and only is complaining about the fact that it isn't all
the changes. Okay, given that Fishworks is a specific product, I think
that some of the changes probably involve tuning, streamlining, and
modifications to make the OS a better storage server at the expense of
other features. In short, changes that are good for Fishworks in
particular but would be bad for OpenSolaris in general. You wouldn't
want those changes in OpenSolaris, would you?
As long as the changes that are good for OpenSolaris are integrated,
and the changes that are not good are made available in source form,
then the Fishworks project has gone beyond the requirements of the
CDDL and done the right thing. Of course, non-covered software has no
such requirement at all.
Anil Gulecha wrote:
On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 2:55 AM, Joerg Schilling
<[email protected]> wrote:
Greg Palmer <[email protected]> wrote:
http://www.nexenta.com/blog
The quote below is rather interesting, though it would have been nice if
he included the specifics of his charge rather than just indulging in a
bit of drive by corporate character assassination.
in early 2009 we were led to understand that Sun Microsystems and other
OpenSolaris developers do not interpret the CDDL quite as we do. It
appears that Sun has elected to make modifications to CDDL licensed code
for their commercial use which they then contribute back only
sporadically, if at all. We hope we are wrong because this could harm
the OpenSolaris community and could result in a sort of tragedy of the
commons.
If Sun does this with source code that has no contributions from non-Sun
people, Sun may do this altough you may dislike it. If Sun would do is with
source code that includes modifications from non-Sun people and if these
modifications from non-Sun people would exceed a certain limit that makes them
"Copyrightable", then Sun would need to make the source code of any
modification available, given that binaries from the code have been published.
Could you explain where you believe to see a problem?
Hi Joerg,
You may be technically/legally correct.. but this is more about how
the Sun wants to participate and build a community around opensolaris.
If it's mission is complete open-ness, and a linux like community
forming around opensolaris, this policy of holding back certain
changes only hurts the mission. I daresay it turns away other
ventures/projects around opensolaris.
Greg: have you seen the response at
http://www.nexenta.com/corp/index.php?option=com_mojo&Itemid=153&p=7
--
Anil
http://www.gulecha.org
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
--
blu
"Murderous organizations have increased in size and scope; they are
more daring, they are served by the most terrible weapons offered by
modern science, and the world is nowadays threatened by new forces
which, if recklessly unchained, may some day wreak universal
destruction." - Arthur Griffith, 1898
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian Utterback - Solaris RPE, Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Ph:877-259-7345, Em:brian.utterback-at-ess-you-enn-dot-kom
_______________________________________________
gnusol-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/gnusol-users
