On 1/30/07, Stephen Harpster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Shawn Walker wrote: > I can't commit to GPLv3 until I see the final license. At this point, I'm not particularly interested. > > I see little benefit to our community and the potential for other communities to succeed at the expense of ours. > > The problem I see with dual licensing is a situation where we end up with sub-communities that are based on the license they choose to work with; where the improvements happen in the GPLv3 community but can't be taken back to the CDDL community and vice versa. > I think that would be a bad idea too. I think the only way it could work would be for all CDDL code to be dual-licensed. If you allowed just CDDL-only code in or just GPLv3-only code in, then you could easily find yourself having to pick and choose pieces and then ending up with a combination that wouldn't work. It's not practical.
mozilla solved it, and opensolaris is an a position to solve it too since developers contributing code have to sign an agreement. I still think it is a bad idea. There is simply no real benefit. nacho _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
