| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Recommendation: no GPLv3 for SolarisRecommendation: no GPLv3 for SolarisPosted Feb 12, 2007 0:37 UTC (Mon) by drag (subscriber, #31333)In reply to: Recommendation: no GPLv3 for Solaris by mrshiny Parent article: Recommendation: no GPLv3 for Solaris
""I mean, you can't say that, just because someone tolerates the status quo, doesn't mean they don't want it to change.""
That's right.
But when somebody _chooses_ to join that statis quo, then that is different. It's one thing to get sucked into it, but it's quite another when somebody volenteers for it.
If they had problems with licensing of OpenSolaris then they would be Linux developers, not OpenSolaris developers. :-)
Plus another thing is that CDDL is a Free software license, by FSF/RMS's definition of the word. The question is one of licensing incompatability, not of freedom on the GPLv3 side (OpenSolaris folks probably like that CDDL allows them to use the code in propriatory software, were the GPLv3 would not)
(Log in to post comments)
|
|
||||||||||||