On 14/09/2007, Richard Elling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Shawn Walker wrote: > > On 14/09/2007, Alan Coopersmith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Shawn Walker wrote: > >>> A few more questions though: > >>> > >>> "What license does it use?" > >> "All of them!" It's a distro after all, and like BSD & Linux > >> distros contains bits under GPL, BSD, MIT, Apache, Artistic, > >> and all the other usual licenses. It's a close call whether > >> more of the OpenSolaris code is GPLv2 (GNOME, Firefox, GNU > >> utilities, etc.) or CDDL (most of ON, NWS, etc.) at this point. > > > > Before I forget, one big thing that we do need out of Sun's legal > > department: > > > > once there is a distribution constructor, there needs to be a very > > clear and concise FAQ about the CDDL and how it can be combined with > > other licenses so that people making their own distributions can be > > confident they are doing "the right thing". It should be general > > advice of course with the disclaimer that they seek their own legal > > counsel, but I think it would be inexcusable to leave people without > > any guidance. > > IMHO it is a bug to need a FAQ for a license, but I don't think there is > a legal category in bugs.opensolaris.org :-) > http://www.opensolaris.org/os/about/faq/licensing_faq/
The existing FAQ doesn't really address compatibility questions or questions that will pertain directly to people building and making their own distribution. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ "Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it. " --Donald Knuth _______________________________________________ indiana-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss
