Glynn Foster wrote:
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.
This is an interesting concern. I'm not sure about getting too many
people directly involved with the code (but I tend to agree with you and
Shawn on this point generally) but we have a similar challenge just
growing and bringing new people into the community in rapidly growing
areas -- such as China, India, and Brazil. From what I've seen, I think
we can actually handle very large numbers of people since most of them
have to be educated about the basics since OpenSolaris is still very
much an American project and what they do will many times be distributed
and not centered around this specific website. I'm very interested in
this issue. It will be fascinating to experience as we grow.
Jim
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
