Stephen Harpster wrote: > There are a lot of GPL bigots out there.
And you *want* to appeal to them? Seriously - why? Are these bigots running datacentres? Are they running startups that have a hope in hell of actually making money - as opposed to generating PR and then just chewing their VC funds? > a dual-license would make it easier to have OpenSolaris use > that larger body of work. How? The larger body of work won't be dual-licensed, and won't have the necessary extra clauses that would allow combination. And you can run GPL apps on a non-GPL OS anyway. Please, before we start getting to much in-love with the idea of community as an end in itself, can we discuss what - and who - Solaris is *for*. I'm personally tired of 'open source communities' telling me to help fix their OS. It happens with BSD as well as Linux, perhaps more so. And its not condusive to wanting to be an OS user and develop my own apps. Don't join them - please! Be the open source OS that has a clear (and clearly explained) focus on *users* - and if that means that the would-be community members who want to own it, and want to have the same-old 'fix it yourself' attitude, are effectively excluded, then that looks like a Very Good Thing to me. Please let's start with: who are the most important members of the community. Is it: a) free-as-in-freedom campaigners b) coders c) users I put it to you that to deliver to users needs strong leadership (NOT some kind of community democracy) and strongly empowered and directed resource application. This is much more important than whether or not amateurs get the hump over the controls in the process. To my mind, its extremely important that Sun maintain strong control, because Sun *is* experienced with servicing a user base - and I doubt I'm the only user that wants it to continue (and improve). James _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
