lack of involvement in the kernel != lack of involvement in free software [LWN.net]

lack of involvement in the kernel != lack of involvement in free software

Posted Jul 24, 2007 20:35 UTC (Tue) by kh (subscriber, #19413)
In reply to: lack of involvement in the kernel != lack of involvement in free software by stevenj
Parent article: Where have the universities gone?

I was thinking the same thing. I see a number of GNU projects from major universities - just not with the kernel. Some quick examples that come to mind - I think UT (Austin) has a policy that all software developed is released under the GPL by default - they have some network management tools in general use. UW (Madison) has GNU Octave

Your BSD example - the code was (mostly?) controlled by one university - which makes for easier scheduling - much like my GNU Octave example above. Maybe that makes smaller projects more desirable.

(Log in to post comments)

lack of involvement in the kernel != lack of involvement in free software

Posted Jul 25, 2007 20:00 UTC (Wed) by jonabbey (subscriber, #2736) [Link]

I think I wrote those network management tools you're referring to, actually. ;-)

UT Austin has approved (but not mandated) the GPL for software release, so long as the designated reviewer at the college level in the org chart signs off on it, and it is believed that the software is not, for some reason, likely to see success as a commercial product. This can be due to it not being designed along commercial product lines (as in our tools, which require a significant amount of systems administration integration work by the adopter), or it can be due to the scope, research vs. application intent, etc.

As I said above, we can still get code out there, but it's not something that can just be done on a whim.