On Mon, 12 Jan 2009, Miles Nordin wrote:
>
> but yeah, that OTness aside, Sun's deliberately crafting their brand
> new CDDL license to be incompatible with the GPL isn't exactly in the
> spirit of free software. BSD is also not in the GPL camp, but the
> mainstream of BSD has altered their licenses where possible to add GPL
> compatibility. The GPL camp moves in the same direction: the GPLv3
> added changes to slightly improve license compatibility.
After all these years, I am still not sure what is meant by free
software. For 99.999% of humanity, "free" means that they don't have
to pay for it. For GPL "free" does not pertain to its use by humans
at all. Instead "free" for GPL is about preventing the "enslavement"
of the source code itself ("enslavement" means distribution of
binaries without source code), as if the source code was a living
breathing creature.
Due to the ambiguity now associated with the "free", I will prefer the
term "open source" and use some other term besides "free" to describe
any encumberances caused by the license.
Bob
======================================
Bob Friesenhahn
bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/
GraphicsMagick Maintainer, http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
