On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 11:04:01AM -0700, W. Wayne Liauh wrote: > Sven Luther wrote: > > <Don't think so, the real point is not GPLing opensolaris, but making the CDDL > LGPL compatible> > > I don't think you can make anything GPL-compatible. What Sun's legal people > should do, IMNSHO, is to try to re-package OpenSolaris so there will be > enough GPLed meat for "Free Software" developers, such as those in the > Debian community, including yourself, to be willing (& able) to take > OpenSolaris under their wings. GPL essentially owns the free-software > developers market, and the trend is indeed strengthening. > > I am sure we can argue days and nites about the virtues of CDDL vis-a-vis > GPL, but if the GPL community doesn't even want to bother with studying the > text of CDDL, what good is that going to do to CDDL supporters? I understand > there is an anti-trust law suit filed against FSF (for their insistence on > every software being GPL'ed). But . . .
Again, you did miss the most important point i wrote, and it concerns making the CDDL *L*GPL compatible, and not GPL itself. The GPL and LGPL are quite different licences. That said, i was told there is not much userland CDDLed stuff to consider, and that basically we have only the OpenSolaris kernel, with a GNU userland to consider, and this scenario doesn't include any problem about CDDLs GPL compatibility, only some legal reservations on debian's part concerning the choice-of-venue and choice-of-law clauses. Will be discussed on the gnu-sol-discuss mailing list, probably cross posted to debian-legal. Friendly, Sven Luther _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list [email protected]
