| |||||||||||||
Choosing between portability and innovationChoosing between portability and innovationPosted Mar 2, 2011 18:44 UTC (Wed) by vonbrand (subscriber, #4458)In reply to: Choosing between portability and innovation by paracyde Parent article: Choosing between portability and innovation
The *BSD problem is (in large part) license mismatch... just like the fiasco with Solaris' ZFS and other goodies in Linux.
(Log in to post comments)
Choosing between portability and innovation Posted Mar 2, 2011 19:33 UTC (Wed) by Cyberax (✭ supporter ✭, #52523) [Link]
X.org is MIT/BSD, so no license problems. GNOME is LGPL - also fairly acceptable.
Choosing between portability and innovation Posted Mar 2, 2011 20:05 UTC (Wed) by vonbrand (subscriber, #4458) [Link] MIT/BSD is acceptable for GPL types (like Linux), but not the other way around.
Choosing between portability and innovation Posted Mar 2, 2011 20:16 UTC (Wed) by michaeljt (subscriber, #39183) [Link]
> The *BSD problem is (in large part) license mismatch... just like the fiasco with Solaris' ZFS and other goodies in Linux.
It is worth pointing out that all the KMS and DRM infrastructure is MIT licenced, and I believe that is at least in part for the benefit of the BSDs and Solaris.
|
|||||||||||||