> > GPL, on the other hand, is aimed at forcing the > world to adopt the > > FSF's "Free" philosophy, and to discourage > "non-free" software in > > all forms. > > This raises an other point I'd like to make, suppose > you have > a choice of different licenses and they are named: > > Fascist Source Code License > Communist Source Code License > Republican Source Code License > Democratic Source Code License > People's Source Code License > Fox News Source Code License > None of the Above Source Code License. > > which one would you pick? > > I'd suggest none of the above; politics doesn't mix > well with anything > people do in real life; I believe programming is one > of these things. > > Chosing the GPL is making a political statement; > requiring people to > publish code under the GPL is requiring them to > subscribe to that > statement. > > Casper
That mirrors my feelings as well. The CDDL is not about a political statement, the GPL very much is. I'm not sure I want to be part of a project making political statements. I view the CDDL as a basic "quid pro quo" agreement with very liberal terms. The GPL does not seem like that to me at all... -Shawn This message posted from opensolaris.org _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list [email protected]
