Linked by David Adams on Mon 7th Mar 2011 17:55 UTC
FreeBSD "How long have you been using FreeBSD. Months? Years? Decades? And you love using it because of whatever reason but at the same time you're feeling a bit guilty to use it all for free without giving anything back? Well now you'll have the chance to change that. We at FreeBSD are always in need of new people who are willing to spare some of their time and effort into FreeBSD development."
Thread beginning with comment 465257
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: maybe its the license
by asdf on Tue 8th Mar 2011 12:38 UTC in reply to "RE: maybe its the license"
asdf
Member since:
2009-09-23

Yeah, GPL makes it safe for companies to contribute without worrying about competitors taking advantage without giving back. The tit-for-tat puts some restriction on what companies can do but it applies to all and thus enables collaboration. In a sense, it works by giving advantage to the group of companies which are collaborating against the ones which don't.

There would be a lot of other factors but one of the reasons why the effect is so prominent in OS development is that it takes inordinate amount of resource to develop and maintain modern OSes. If a group of company is collaborating on single project, it becomes extremely costly for isolated companies to maintain the same level of competitiveness, and as a result we've been seeing extensive consolidation of OS development effort centered around linux.

More liberal licenses sure work well for some projects but they're usually much more focused smaller projects which don't necessarily require similar level of consolidated effort.

It's really about the economy of things and that's the natural and beautiful part.

Reply Parent Score: 1

nt_jerkface Member since:
2009-08-26

Yeah, GPL makes it safe for companies to contribute without worrying about competitors taking advantage without giving back. The tit-for-tat puts some restriction on what companies can do but it applies to all and thus enables collaboration.


The GPL sure isn't protecting Red Hat from Oracle. There is no tit-for-tat that the GPL ensures, Oracle can undercut Red Hat's subscription revenue without contributing anything.

But it should be noted that Oracle does contribute to the kernel (btrfs), unlike a certain other distro that sounds like a type of African coffee.

Reply Parent Score: 3

allanregistos Member since:
2011-02-10

But it should be noted that Oracle does contribute to the kernel (btrfs)


It was noted, however, Oracle did it because they need it for their Linux farms, not that Red Hat or other people needs it.

unlike a certain other distro that sounds like a type of African coffee.


You people are just short-sighted, joining the circus of criticizing Canonical for not contributing back.

Canonical is totally different from Oracle. Their focus is on the desktop and in the server and what the desktop user needs. While Oracle have a massive software portfolio, where the Linux kernel is of prime importance because of this, so they have to develop(not contribute) to let their applications run at top speed using the Linux kernel. And knowing that the Linux kernel was licensed through the GPL2, they need to show/contribute their changes back. Oracle need not to worry about desktop users at the OS level, as this is not their prime target of their massive software portfolio, whereas Canonical is so focus on the OS desktop and so with their resources. So, contributing back to the kernel at Canonical is not that strong as it is from Oracle.

Reply Parent Score: 1