Keith M Wesolowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 22, 2005 at 02:39:09PM -0500, Shawn Walker wrote:
>
> > justifiably or not is a matter of opinion. Even if the CDDL wasn't an
> > obstacle, I don't believe they would accept the binary redistribution
> > guidelines that parts of ON will likely always be under.
>
> Such fatalism! You have the freedom to write compatible (or
> incompatible if you really want) replacements for those components.
> "We'll always have these binaries" reflects conscious choice, not
> immutable laws of physics.
This is what I frequently read on Linux related lists but people don't do it
unless they have a personal interest in doing so...
If all all OSS users were enthusiasts, we had more free software. The big
problem is that the OSS motion did create a lot of lazy people who just wait
for things to happen and who demand for new solutions istead of creating
solutions.
Jörg
--
EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (uni)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
