On Mon, 2006-11-13 at 19:48 +0800, Tao Chen wrote:
> On 11/13/06, Bob Palowoda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > If Sun does this, it is a good step, but it would
> > > stigmatise the CDDL as a license that is not really
> > > loved even
> > > inside Sun.
> > >
> > > Anybody knows more?
> >
> >  It's not an OpenSolaris issue.  Java is not part of OpenSolaris.
> >
> 
> <quote>Sun may consider using the GPL for its other open-source
> products, such as OpenSolaris. "I'm completely signed up to reevaluate
> our whole licensing protocol," Green said.</quote>
> http://news.com.com/Sun+picks+GPL+license+for+Java+code/2100-7344_3-6134584.html?tag=nefd.top
> 
> I don't expect Sun change OpenSolaris license anytime soon, though.
> Let's watch how GPL'ed Java is going to evolve for the next year.
> 
> According to Mr.Gosling, Java source will also be managed by
> Mercurial, I think that's a good news for us.
> http://blogs.sun.com/jag/entry/gpl_v2_wins!
> 
> Congratulations. I think in Java's case, Sun may have picked the right
> license + exception.

I have the same feeling. Good move.

And if we will see that Java/GPL community grows way faster then
OpenSolaris/CDDL, than obvious questions will arise ... i.e. why not
dual license OpenSolaris with GPL too?

-- 
Erast

_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
[email protected]

Reply via email to