On Tue, 5 Sep 2006, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Alan Burlison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
As long as Danese may be quotetd by people like Debian to "prove" their
wrong claims on the OpenSolaris project and there is no way to even
verify that Danese is the only one who worked/works for Sun and spreads
this strange claim. Debian & friends will convince a lot of people
to stay away from OpenSolaris unless there is help against this kind
of agression against the OpenSolaris project.
Simon has already posted on this forum regarding Danese's statements, and I
didn't read anything in the Debian post which mentioned OpenSolaris, nor did I
read anything about OpenSolaris on the Slashdot thread which it spawned. I
don't see this as an attack on OpenSolaris by the Debian folks, and we need to
be careful not to characterise it as one.
I did already point to the related article:
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/77565
---->
Um die von zahlreichen grafischen CD- und DVD-Brennprogrammen unter Linux
verwendeten Programme der cdrtools gibt es Streitigkeiten, seit deren Autor
Jörg Schilling,
der auch an einer eigenen OpenSolaris-Distribution mit dem Namen Schillix
arbeitet, in
neueren Versionen des Pakets nach und nach einige Teile unter die
Open-Source-Lizenz
CDDL (Common Development and Distribution License) stellte. Laut einigen
Entwicklern
sei dieser Lizenz-Mix nicht zulässig; sie erwägen daher eine eigene Variante
der cdrtools zu
pflegen und haben einen Fork initiiert.
<----
Read it and understand why this is an attack on OpenSolaris that
is even published outside Debian.
Heise claims that the fact that I am working on OpenSolaris did
cause the conflict.
No they don't. Casually mentioning that you are active in OpenSolaris may
create that association in the mind, but that's not equivalent to actually
stating e.g. "his work on OpenSolaris has lead to him changing the license
for parts of cdrtools". They don't state anything like that. What's read
between the lines is up to the reader ... and journalists are always
biased in one way or the other.
This is a political thing, there are two camps here:
1. Jörg, who (legitimally, IMHO) wants the question answered:
"How can I co-package free software components that come under
different opensource licenses ?"
2. Debian, who (also legitimally - but lazy) answers this question with:
"Simple: by (since you control that) using the strictest license
for everything, and that'd be the GPL".
In short, you're not ok with that answer because it evades the question
from your point of view as much as it answers it from the point of view of
the Debianistas ... you don't like that they don't help you achieve what
you want, and Debian just don't get it that the uttermost simple solution
(from their point of view) isn't appealing to you at all.
That's where the huge chasm is that prevents you from finding common
ground. But I don't much see what that has to do with OpenSolaris.
Mentioning that is firing smoke grenades.
I mean, the question is interesting. Can I, for example, port a Linux
kernel driver that is GPL to Solaris, and legally run it ?
I hope to eventually get a positive answer to that ... but not here and
now; back to work :)
FrankH.
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
