Alan DuBoff wrote:
For me the big difference is the fact that GPLv3 will remove the grey area of
device drivers and linking with the kernel, not that these are an issue, it's
never been take to and proven in court either way. I'm *HOPING* that GPLv3
would remove that problem and allow all code to be used however the systems
should use it.
I actually think it makes it MUCH more complex.
It was possible *before* OpenSolaris to write and legally ship a GPLv2
device driver for Solaris if you stuck to the DDI. This is really no
different that writing a GPLv2 application that uses a closed source libc.
It is still possible today.
Today it is possible to do more with the CDDL because you can now
"share" code with other drivers and be "fully" open source or just use
individual files from them (and publish your changes if you make any)
and keep other bits closed if you wish.
I think GPLv3 will make this MUCH harder to understand, and a dual
licensed GPLv3 and CDDL kernel makes this near impossible to understand
for developers.
Remember most people here are not trained lawyers or even have a huge
amount of formal exposer to the legal issues of derived works and dual
licensing. Lets keep things SIMPLE for the developers. CDDL is a good
solution for that - it makes it clear for every single file which
license it is under (just like the BSD license did).
--
Darren J Moffat
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
