Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 19th Jun 2007 10:29 UTC, submitted by binarycrusader
Oracle and SUN Simon Phipps of Sun has responded to the recent criticism of Sun's openness, pointing out that even releasing information that they may already have costs a lot of money. "Jonathan asked me to look into this, to ensure we're pursuing an open path across all of Sun, not simply the software group. We take all input seriously, and we can't solve all problems for all parties, but we're committed to doing our best to faithfully engage with all the communities we serve, in the same spirit as the existing Open Source Ombudsman Scheme. With the support of my team and others in the community I'll try to build a new scheme that is fair and transparent."
Permalink for comment 249065
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Yeah
by ctl_alt_del on Tue 19th Jun 2007 21:44 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Yeah"
ctl_alt_del
Member since:
2006-05-14

"I don't know you could truly call it open if it's tied down by licensing. To me, it'll only be truly open when it's allowed to be freely ported and modified."

http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/zfs-discuss/2007-April/026922...

I would consider that "freely ported and modified".

Reply Parent Score: 1