> Hey, > > Stephen Harpster wrote: > > I'm also not asking to replace CDDL. I'm asking if > people think it > > would be a good idea to dual-license OpenSolaris > CDDL code with GPLv3. > > Of course that depends on what the final outcome of > GPLv3 is, but > > assuming it looks close to what it is today, would > you like that, not > > like that, or not care? > > I don't really believe I'm enough of a stakeholder in > OpenSolaris (ON) to feel > like I have a say in the matter, but what I'd really > like to see is a set of > scenarios of how this would work - in terms of > committing code back, > distributing code, and linking to the current closed > sources. > > As a random aside, I'd be worried that dual licensing > would attract more people > to the code base that we still haven't been able to > get to an operational level > for non-Sun contributions - perhaps that's a good > worry to have, but I'd really > like to see serious progress being made before such a > move is possible. > > > Glynn > _______________________________________________ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > [email protected] >
Agreed. I think a smoother streamlined integration process would be far more beneficial than any license changes or additions at this point. There aren't enough resources available to do this, and it's unfair to expect SUN employees to do this in their spare time. The engineers have enough to do :) -Shawn This message posted from opensolaris.org _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list [email protected]
