Casper H. Dik wrote:
<I think Roy is merely pointing out that "OpenSolaris should be under
GPL" discussions and there derivatives ("CDDL is better than GPL",
"GPL is better than CDDL", "GPL is not free", "CDDL is not free")
are pointless and have no place on opensolaris-discuss because the
license situations is not going to change.>
I am not so sure.
A couple of days ago, Sun relicensed OpenOffice.org under LPGL, thus officially
RIPped Sun's own SISSL.
I am sure Sun's smart marketing professionals will carefully evaluate the
situation and come out with a solution--perhaps with a few changes in the
kernel structure and the "overall" licensing scheme, among many other
things--that will make OpenSolaris GPL-compatible and thus provide the fuel to
rocket the Solaris/OpenSolaris spaceship. At the present time, CDDL provides
the optimum mechanism for Sun to sorta open source the Solaris kernel. But
CDDL may not be the ultimate solution.
I know an increasing number of Windows users are moving to Linux because
OpenOffice.org now actually works better in Linux than Microsoft Office in
Windows (XP Pro). As I mentioned in a separate thread, Office is providing
more than 60% of Microsoft's profits. OpenOffice.org is going to become a very
important asset (revenue-wise) for Sun, and Sun is not going to let the
licensing issue stop this possibility. Shall we say, ditto for OpenSolaris?
This message posted from opensolaris.org
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
