4 ms·
That is true. But it is weaker than GPL in that it permits mixing CDDL code with non-CDDL code. The argument that the essay appears to be making is that large
by nequo 4y ago
That is true. But it is weaker than GPL in that it permits mixing CDDL code with non-CDDL code.
The argument that the essay appears to be making is that large companies want to establish themselves as monopolies by requiring that competing forks publish their changes, incorporating the good changes, and outgunning them on overall development effort. My reading is that the CDDL would not force forks to publish the source code for changes that are made to non-CDDL source files.
- arp242 4y agoThe backstory of the CDDL is that Solaris used some code written by contractors over the decades, and Sun didn't have the rights to relicense them and didn't want to spend the effort rewriting all of it either. Since then, illumos has rewritten all those components. It was a pragmatic and useful decision at the time that's become rather frustrating with ugly workarounds of dubious legality ("GPL condom"). I wish Sun had written in a GPL-compatibility clause similar to the copyleft EUPL.
- bch 4y ago> Since then, illumos has rewritten all those components But apparently kept the same license? >> Most of the existing code is licensed under the CDDL and we expect new code will generally be under this license as well.[0] [0] https://github.com/illumos/illumos-gate https://github.com/illumos/illumos-gate
- arp242 4y agoThey can't just relicense it without approval of all the authors/copyright holders, Oracle being chief among them. And we all know how Oracle treated OpenSolaris...