[indiana-discuss] Name of Distro?

[Alan Coopersmith]

Eric Boutilier wrote:
> Kidding aside, that's a major point of confusion (especially with the
> slashdot crowd). Here's the thing (I'm pretty sure): The agreement is
> needed only for contributions that want to be part of something Sun
> Microsystems ships or plans to ship some day (e.g.  Nevada). I'm pretty
> sure, no company would take on the legal risk of not requiring that.

But many community projects require it too, since it allows a central
entity to deal with things such as enforcing against those who distribute
in violation of the terms, or to decide when to move to new licenses.

The latest Sun contributor agreement was updated to more closely match
some of the terms used in the FSF contributor agreement for GNU projects.
That something as large as Linux doesn't have one is actually the oddball
here, and something that makes it painful for them to switch to a license
other than GPLv2 even if they could all agree on whether GPLv3 is better
or worse.

-- 
	-Alan Coopersmith-           alan.coopersmith at sun.com
	 Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering

_______________________________________________
indiana-discuss mailing list
indiana-discuss at opensolaris.org
http://opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss


--
This message posted from opensolaris.org