Will Sun look to use the GPL for offerings it has already open-sourced, such as the OpenSolaris version of its operating system? That was the topic of discussion in this exchange between Jonathan Schwartz, Sun's president and CEO, and Rich Green, the company's senior VP of software at an event to formally open-source Java. "We will take a close look at it," Green said, adding that it was possible that the familiarity and comfort level developers have with the GPL may result in Sun adopting it for OpenSolaris.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-09-16
Sorry, I missed the point you're trying to make via the article you cited. It seemed to concern IBM's "disappointment" that Sun released Java under GPL rather than donating the code to the Harmony project.
Where do you see a lack of leadership or mature attitudes on the part of the OpenSolaris project?
Member since:2006-08-26
Where do you see a lack of leadership or mature attitudes on the part of the OpenSolaris project?
Sorry, I should have been clearer and please bear with my emotion. I am merely assuming that a GPLed OpenSolaris will be immediately "positioned" as THE Linux contender, and I am trying to figure out the biggest obstacle. I wrote:
"No thanks. If the leadership and mature attitudes are not there for OpenSolaris, Linux will be the choice."
I am referring to a future, diverse group whose disparate agendas would be best served by realizing that OpenSolaris is the way forward. In particular, the *BSD fractures in the face of Linux dominance is the kind of wasteful problem that sufficiently enlighted and diplomatic Sun project managers could turn around to their advantage! It's a fascinating management problem, I suppose. Could Sun pull this off?
I confess that this implies the accelerated demise of the *BSD projects. I have nothing against any *BSD--I just consider that the divisions, especially in contrast to Linux, are ultimately a tragic waste.
Pardon me for a little brain-storming: I am not sure if Sun realizes what GPLing Java has really done--the enthusiasm these kinds of actions will unleash among geeks, particularly the younger, more liberal crowd. Sun needs to come up with more stories where they can milk this for all it's worth. A great story (even if told explicitly in only the mind of a leader) would help immensely if they end up GPLing OpenSolaris. Don't yet write this off as flakey, hippie nonsense--Sun is getting into a new game and needs some humility.
Edited 2006-11-16 18:31
Member since:2006-08-26
Sorry, I missed the point you're trying to make via the article you cited. It seemed to concern IBM's "disappointment" that Sun released Java under GPL rather than donating the code to the Harmony project.
The point I was trying to make was simply an intuition from not just the article, but also the discussion on LWN and a bit of development mail activity.
Of course, that intuition could be totally wrong--that's one reason why I kept the claim of pettiness general, not aimed at any entity in particular. Anyway, it's not the kind of thing I would want a project to be surprised by!
Member since:
2006-08-26
Warning: this comment might come off as condemning non-GPL licenses. Careful readers will see that the main point has nothing to do with this. (After all, the only piece of software in the topic of the discussion is just a kernel, not the entire OS!)
The following article and discussion about a Java project describe concerted anti-GPL efforts inside and outside of Sun:
http://lwn.net/Articles/209274/
I never knew the opposition to the GPL for Java was so intense, organized, and petty. This puts the future of OpenSolaris in a more sobering perspective. Pettiness is something all of us suffer from in various ways, but it was a major element here, IMO. Yet we failed to acknowledge this factor in our discussion. Note that I am not claiming anti-GPL = petty. There are excellent reasons for not using the GPL. However, pettiness was apparent among some of the attitudes in this case.
The only popular free kernel in the future will be Linux unless some kernel developers conquer their own pettiness.
So, I could be petty: five years from now I would be using and propping up an obsolete, once-great kernel (clearly not Linux!) that maybe only a thousand (and dwindling) other holdouts use, but that's OK dammit because my license WXYZ is not the GPL!
No thanks. If the leadership and mature attitudes are not there for OpenSolaris, Linux will be the choice.
Edited 2006-11-16 08:10