On Nov 16, 2007, at 13:42, Joerg Schilling wrote: > "Shawn Walker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> On 15/11/2007, James Carlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> Shawn Walker writes: >>>> For example, if I wanted to take the source code of the hypervisor >>>> manager and add bits and pieces of OpenSolaris code to it; I could >>>> not. Even though it comes from Sun and is OS-related in my view. >>> >>> As best I can see, there seems to be no such conflict. The whole >>> point of GPLv3 is to allow for exceptions that make it compatible >>> with >>> other file-by-file licenses. >> >> Sun will have to add that exception of course, and I hope they do. >> Thanks for the reminder though. > > The problem with the GPLv3 is that any redistributor may take away > these > exceptions.
But by doing so they are no longer a part of the community originating the code. They are then either a downstream or a fork. Downstreams are good things since they increase adoption, and forks only flourish if they can attract a critical mass of developers. Thus, I don't find the freedom to make the license revert to a more restrictive form much of a worry in community terms. S. _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list [email protected]
