Alan DuBoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wednesday 16 August 2006 03:45 am, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> > After viewing the video from Debconf6, I can say the following:
>
> I did watch this video a couple days ago. Ironically, Don Armstrong (I only
> knew him as Don in the video) was at the Debian booth today at LinuxWorld.
>
> Don actually seems very reasonable, and I hope that Sun can work with folks
> like Don and Debian Legal to come to some agreement. This community should at
> least let Sun figure out how to deal with it.
Be careful with him....he is superficial.
While he is the only person from Debian who did not send obviously wrong claims
about the GPL (as I already noted, the typical habbit of Debian people was to
send quotes from GPL §2 and to claim that they were talking about GPL §3 or
sending completely selfmade sentences made from fractions of the GPL text), he
did stop sending replies to me after he found that his arguments have not been
valid arguents against my claims.
As a result, he is the person from Debian who did cause most frustration because
he did first look like a person it makes sense to discuss with, but later just
replied: "sorry, I do not have the time to continue the discussion".
This is another reason, why I call Debian non trustworthy... First starting
a useful discussion and later telling you "I have no time to continue the
discussion" but keeping the claim that you are "violating the GPL" although
he did run out of arguments to prove his claims is at least extremely impolite.
> > While Simon was very informative and correct, Danese Cooper did
> > unfortunately claim that Sun developers did like to make the CDDL
> > incompatible to the GPL by intention. If you carefully watch the video, you
> > see that Simon did not like this but preferred not to respond in order to
> > avoid a dispute.
>
> I strongly feel the engineers were mis-represented, at least the ones I know
> in Solaris Engineering. There seemed to be a lot of contention between Danese
> Cooper stating that the engineers wanted the license to be incompatible with
> the GPL, purposely, and I think that was mis-interpeted by the audience. It
> was apparent in how many Qs about that specific followed, there was at least
> 3. Generalized comments about what the engineers felt is unfair, since there
> was a wide scope of what each of them felt should have been done.
I remember a long (several hours) discussion with Andy Tucker in September 2004.
The results at that time have been:
- It must not be the BSDl as the Solaris developers don't like this.
- It cannot be the GPL because this would prevent "Sun Solaris" to be
based on "Open Solaris".
- It should not be dual licensed because people then may add (as done
with OpenOffice) code that Sun cannot legally use and because it
would weaken the patent provisions Sun likes to have.
a 1.5 hour phone conference with Andy and Claire Giordano in December did not
gice any new information regarding to the background for license selection.
I know of no proof that Sun did make the CDDL incompatible by intention and
I hope that this kind of rumor will stop.
> > Unfortunately, the total effect on the Debian people was that they
> > remembered the (wrong) claim from Danese but forgot about all the correct
> > information from Simon.
>
> I believe Simon could have said some better things, and certainly Danese
> could
> have given more encouraging words. Simon faces a large problem in that he
> represents Sun Legal, Sun Management, and Solaris Engineering, and this is a
> very broad range of areas within Sun to represent.
Yes, I had the impression that Simon for some reason did not tell all he could
tell in order to clear up things.
> So, let's give Sun a chance to look at and understand any license issues
> between CDDL and Debian/GPL and/or free/non-free, ok? Please let Sun work
> this issue so it doesn't turn into a flamefest, which is how the past email
> exchanged is described as.
Maybe you are more succesful with Don thyn I have been.
Good luck!
Jörg
--
EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (uni)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
