Slashdot Mirror


Samba Team Urges Novell To Reconsider

hde226868 writes "The team responsible for Samba has just asked Novell to reconsider its recent patent agreement with Microsoft, arguing that the agreement is a divisive agreement, effectively splitting the open source movement into groups with and without commercial status. Samba argues that with this move Novell is disregarding the will of the people who write the software sold by Novell and that Novell has 'no right to make self servicing deals on behalf of others which run contrary to the goals and ideals of the Free Software community'."

8 of 472 comments (clear)

  1. samba by msh104 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    just like the samba team, I don't think that this agreement with microsoft will bring good fruits. what I like about the open source movement is that it provides you with software that allow you to go to sleep at night without worry. the software that will result from this agreement will be everything except that.

  2. Re:whee by Stumbles · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Sure does seem like it and frankly I have not been able to work my brain around the notion this agreement DOES NOT violate some aspect of GPLv2. And maybe, just maybe that's what Microsoft was REALLY after.... to get Novells right to distribute GPL code revoked. If that were to happen it seems to me it would put a big hurt on Novell. Microsoft is not known, nor has it been known NOT to stab a company in the back or setup a chain of events that in the long run damages or distroys it's competitor.

    --
    My karma is not a Chameleon.
  3. For Novell, it's all about the money by Salvance · · Score: 4, Interesting

    At a philosophical level, Novell probably didn't want to sign the agreement with Microsoft either ... heck, Microsoft basically destroyed them as a leading software provider. But they're in an unenviable position of trying to turn a profit. That's the double edged sword of large companies getting in the open source game. On one side, they offer massive resources that can champion and push forward technologies that groups working in their spare time cannot. On the other, they must find a way to recoup some of those expenses, which sometimes lead them down the path that we've all worked hard to stay off (namely, software patents, commercialization, and closed sourcing parts of their product).

    Unfortunately I think we'll just have to deal with some closed source Linux programs and some software patents for technologies that required massive investment. The key is to pick our battles - e.g. to ensure that the entire Linux kernel, and all "typical" programs are open source and protected under the GPL (or other similar license).

    --
    Crack - Free with every butt and set of boobs
  4. Where's Linus durring al of this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Where's Linus durring al of this? I mean he's vocal as all hell when the GPL3 drafts start floating around, but on this he's silent?!

  5. Re:Stop your bitching by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Actually, the Samba developers did say you couldn't do this in their copyright license. Novell is deliberately attempting to make a loophole in that license. It's sort of a "screw you" gesture from Novell to Samba to abuse their license that way.

    Bruce

  6. Divide your enemies by greg_barton · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Microsoft is just now getting around to "art of war" type tactics: divide your enemies. "He will win whose army is animated by the same spirit throughout all its ranks." They're trying to divide the open source movement's spirit.

    Everything up to this point has been driven by hubris on their part. Now, they're finally serious about fighting open source.

    This is gonna be fun. :)

  7. GPL Version 3 by Morosoph · · Score: 3, Interesting

    There's a simple way to make Novell uncompetitive: release your code under the GPL version 3. What's touch and go in version 2 is clarified in version 3.

    Novell, most likely, won't be licenced to use your code. You get the additional benefit of community defence against future antisocial and free-riding behaviour.

  8. Re:whee by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Microsoft owned SCO at one time. In fact, the Santa Cruz Office of Microsoft became SCO. I have a machine here in my collection with pre-SCO Microsoft Xenix installed and running on it. Microsoft in their pre-MS-DOS days developed the first port of UNIX to run on the Intel 8086 processor, called Xenix. When Billy decided he didn't want to do UNIX anymore, it was all split off to become SCO.

    SCO was an entity formed by Microsoft. It was once owned by Microsoft.