>The truth is that the dominant open source/free software/whatever you name it >community is based on GPLed programs, and thus it is their opinion that an >GPL-compatible OpenSolaris makes more sense for everyone involved, but they >can only ask you to do it, and point you out the advantages of it in order to >convince you.
That's very much up for debate and ignores Mozilla, *BSD, X.org and other substantial projects. Also, this discussion simply ignores the fact that the source of Solaris is in a state which is not compatible with the GPL; we can not use the GPL even if we wanted to; and that's because of limitations in the GPL. >That said, i would never willingly release myself code under a BSDish licence, >unless i get some compensation for it. The GPL has no such problem, because >the way the GPL is used itself is compensation enough. Why is that? It's clear that the BSD license is more free than the GPL license because you can do more with it; it almost looks like you're afraid soemone might "steal" free code. Casper _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
