| 1 |
le Sun, 27 May 2007 23:32:49 +0000 (UTC) |
| 2 |
Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net> a écrit: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> Not necessarily (or likely) /all/ their software, but significant parts |
| 5 |
> of it. OpenSolaris is currently CDDL, which /is/ OSI approved as a real |
| 6 |
> "open" license, but was designed in part deliberately to be GPLv2 |
| 7 |
> incompatible. Apparently, they weren't interested in Linux "stealing" |
| 8 |
> their technologies, which they thought would happen if they made it GPLv2 |
| 9 |
> compatible. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
Solaris' dev team had diverging points of view about GPL being relevant for a private firm as Sun. Now it looks like there was room for a single conception over there. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
> They ARE considering dual-licensing Solaris under GPLv3, however, which |
| 14 |
> they've been working closely with the FSF on. Of course that's not a |
| 15 |
> given until it's out, but it'd definitely widen the interest base (I for |
| 16 |
> one may well be interested, especially if Linux stays GPLv2 only). |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
You mean the bare kernel, right? Solaris' kernel could be an alternative to linux? Is the latter really different from the *BSD's? I've installed a NetBSD on my machine "for fun" recently (tho I switched back to using my good'ol gentoo, can't get used to anything else now. pkgsrc looks like a sympathetic old auntie); it appears to practice monolithic kernel. What would be different in running a GPLv3 kernel? I've read about the anti-DRM part of it; is there some other reason you/we could be interested in it? |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
BTW isn't there a technical issue licensing a single version of a soft against two incompatible licenses? Or did you mean dual-licensing GPLv2 and GPLv3? |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
> Of course Linus and the other kernel devs were originally very much |
| 23 |
> against early GPLv3 drafts. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Is it a matter of diverging positions towards industrial partners/users? |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
> The Gentoo Java devs are working on it, but as I said, I don't |
| 28 |
> believe enough of the entire Java infrastructure has been released as GPL |
| 29 |
> yet to do the entire thing as sources. Even after it has, it'll take |
| 30 |
> several months as experimental ebuilds in the Java overlay (emerge layman |
| 31 |
> and read up on using it, if interested) |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Ok! Does anyone know the difference between the java-overlay and the java-gcj-overlay? |
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
gentoo-amd64@g.o mailing list |
Archives