At 01:00 2/11/00 +0100, you wrote:
>Aaron Mulder wrote:
>> On Wed, 1 Nov 2000, Ole Husgaard wrote:
>> > I have a few, but let me give you one of the possible scenarios
>> > I fear most:
>>
>> Fear? This is the situation I *hope for* most!
>
>I hope there are a few things in this scenario you do _not_ *hope for*:
>- A vendor making their own private modifications to the jBoss
> source without contributing their modifications back to the
> project, or even publishing their modifications.
very few vendors would do that for mere practical reasons. The reason many
choose OSS is because it is higher quality, cheaper to maintain etc. Now
creating their own branch will increase costs, lower quality etc. They get
no advantage from doing this.
I can see them close sourcing configuration/installshield/management style
applications but usually they won't be linked against jboss directly and
thus the viral GPL clauses wont effect them.
If you want vendors to contribute then the best way is to make it as easy
as possible to do so. Blocking their usage via GPL may serve a higher
purpose but it means that they are less likely to adopt jBoss and means
much less likely to reach critical mass. If you don't reach critical mass
fast enough you die and jBoss will languish - up to you on how you run it -
both ways have advantages and disadvantages.
>- A vendor claiming they have found bad bugs in the original
> jBoss code and fixed them in their own. That _is_ good for
> sales and differentiating _their_ jBoss distribution from
> other jBoss distributions.
Never heard of that happening at all. Do you have an example that has
occured ?
>- A vendor adding hooks and twists to their jBoss distribution
> to tie their customers to their jBoss distribution.
They may add features but I doubt they would hooks for same reasons given
above.
>It might be easier to just go public domain, but by using
>copyright and a license we have a chance to say some reasonable
>requirements (like contributing modificated code back) _must_
>be met in exchange for using and redistributing our code.
but you also restrict them in many many many ways - so much so they may
choose to go elsewhere (FWIW I would never condone using GPL java product
when I do consulting). You have failed to uphold the GPL yourselves - what
hope have others for doing so ? And what if they need to link against
propritry code .... they can't.
>Starting commercial enterprises for adding value to OSS is
>hard. I think it should be allowed, but adding their own
>private modifications without publishing the source of the
>modifications under the original license should IMO _not_
>be allowed.
>Looks to me like this kind of enterprises can add the most
>value by offering support and warranties.
That is basically the only way they can make money. Look at any of the OSS
companies and you will see that none of them sell products but all of them
sell services.
>> Now, let's consider companies such as X03 and Olliance, who are
>> providing commercial *open-source* server products, based on projects like
>> jBoss.
>
>Don't know Olliance, but X03 seems to accept the GPL restrictions,
>and so does dozens of other enterprises.
I put it to you that they don't know what they are doing is illegal and
they could be made to pay through the teeth if something goes wrong ;)
>We already have two such "competitors", and they did not
>pop up because of the license problems at hand.
>I do not think that changing to their licenses will make
>them disappear.
>The BSD license is so permissive that in the long run
>only _one_ "competitor" with this license survives.
your very right. One of the differences between GPL and BSD is the way the
peeps operate. I have no idea why that is but it does happen. BSD style
projects tend to collaborate a lot more and tend to merge together. BSD
style projects also seem to fork less and have higher quality products. I
am not sure why this is but it does seem to happen.
Cheers,
Pete
*------------------------------------------------------*
| "Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want |
| to test a man's character, give him power." |
| -Abraham Lincoln |
*------------------------------------------------------*
