> On Wed, 2007-01-31 at 10:42 -0800, Rich Teer wrote: > > On Wed, 31 Jan 2007, Erast Benson wrote: > > > > > it to happen? None or one! And I bet Sun would > like to increase outside > > > contribution too but with CDDL alone it is just > not possible in > > > foreseeable future. People afraid to contribute > to CDDL projects for > > > variety of reasons, look how cdrecord has been > forked to be pure GPL > > > project just because of that. > > > > I submit that the license is not why there are > fewer external contributions > > than we'd like. I think it's because it's an > onerous process at the moment, > > and perhaps because people might be wary of signing > a Contributor Agreememnt. > > I agree, re-licensing alone will not cure us entirely > but will help > dramatically. Its a combination of steps. 1) > Re-licensing, 2) get rid of > Contributor Agreement, 3) get rid of closed bins.
The contributor agreement isn't going anywhere. It just makes plain good sense to have. Any project without one is on shaky legal ground. > > If anything, I think people are "afraid" to > contribute to non-Sun CDDLed > > projects is because of FUD spread by the anti-CDDL > factions. I remember > > some assertions that said words to the effect of > "ownership of any CDDLed > > code reverts to Sun", when that is patently not the > case. > > and we don't want to constantly fight against this > FUD... > > -- > Erast Sorry, but rolling over and giving up seems like the lame way out of this. Not only that, it is not an option for me personally. -Shawn This message posted from opensolaris.org _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list [email protected]
