If it was just text editing and not code hinting, folding, anti-aliasing, line counting, syntax checking, and a bunch of other things all at the same time -- I might agree with that. However, in this case, I think you're misusing John's quote.
interesting. Sun's aware of GPL v3 and what it means (eg, they have discussed licensing open solaris as GPL v3 to prevent code from being used by linux). I'm guessing they don't want to give up their patents just yet. Don't forget they paid SCO.
Bzzzt. Wrong. The GPLv2 has an implicit patent license; the GPLv3 has an explicit; there is not really a large difference as far as licensing patents that go with the code is concerned. In Sun's case, it would be the same.
Also, they didn't "pay sco" in the way you are implying; they *licensed* technology from SCO that they needed to support their customers since they were *legally* bound to do so. Let's not twist the truth so far shall we?
That's wrong. Actually the latest version of the SCA explicitly promises that contributions will remain under a free software license. Also, it is *joint* ownership. Which means you still have all the rights you did before to the code, it's just that Sun gets all of the same rights too.
"The Dev team even admitted the SP campaign was pure crap! That right there says quite a lot."
The Dev team said no such thing as far as I am aware. Please provide your source for this statement.
Then you are either:
1) Inexperienced gamer or
2) Have a very low thresh-hold for enjoymentAssumptions tend to get people in trouble. I have been gaming on the PC since the early 1980's. My threshold for enjoyment is "not very low" -- it's just that I happen to thoroughly enjoy the story and artwork in the original NWN. I have hundreds of PC game titles on my shelves, some good, some bad.
I never said I enjoyed NWN "over" prior games, just that I enjoyed it. Although there are some prior games I didn't enjoy as much. For example, I never could bring myself to finish Baldur's Gate I, even though I finished NWN I. Why? I just wanted to play it for the story and quests, I didn't want to control each individual member of my party. Your preference to do so, and insinuation that it is a inclination towards mediocrity is a opinion not shared by the general gaming public at best.
Before you accuse me of not understanding or being a true D&D fan, yes, I do have the Player's Handbook, etc.
Of course but because something is popular doesn't make it good. I'm not the only one that feels that gaming is backsliding into mediocrity.
Businesses exist to make money. Game developers make games. Therefore it follows that they make games their public wants to play because that makes money. If people want to play games that folks like you see a mediocre, then more power to the game developers for making them. Life is too short to take things that seriously. Fun is fun. There's a reason that Nintendo is so successful right now, and its because they aren't catering to Ivory Tower gamers like you.
No one has proven that is an effective capitalist tool for all types of software though.
For example, no one in the gaming industry has yet tried this approach from the outset.
The closest example would be iD Software's GPLing of various components years after commercial viability of an engine, but that doesn't really count...
Ian is one employee of *thousands* that work on Solaris. He does not dictate the official direction or what is included in Solaris. So his project is just that -- a project among hundreds at Sun that involves Solaris.
So it doesn't really matter what Ian decided to do with his project, unless the rest of the teams decide to adopt his work, and the community does too, what he says or does doesn't mean squat.
Actually, many of the local libraries in the city where he burned them won't take donated books. I don't know why, but last I was told, it was something to do with liability. I know, I donated some books in hopes to see them put on the shelves for others, but instead even though they were in mint condition, they were sold for a mere pittance at the library bookstore to raise money to buy other books:(
That's one way to look at it. My own experience is that it's far more likely the former employee simply no longer has a vested interest in hiding the ugly truth about their former employer's methods, motivations, or prectices.
In this case, what she said is known to not be true, so it's an axe to grind. Mystery solved.
Danese Cooper is the primary author of the CDDL; if there's anyone who knows the CDDL, it's her.
That doesn't make her right, even if she was the primary author, and I have never seen anything listing her as the primary author. In addition, even Simon Phipps of SUN has stated that what she said was not correct:
Nonetheless she is wrong to characterise the opinion of the Solaris engineering team in the way she does. She is speaking this way because she lost an argument inside Sun, not because her view is representative of the views of Sun or its staff in the way she claims. She, along with many actual engineers, was an advocate of using GPL for OpenSolaris but the need to release rather than wait for one of {GPL v3, Mozilla license revision, encumbrance removal} meant that this was not possible. I am still furious with her for the statement she made at DebConf, which was spiteful and an obstacle to a united FOSS movement.
Is your point that we should trust "official" statements by a corporation more than we should trust the statements of a former employee? If so, I don't see why we should accept that.
Maybe because former employers are more likely to have an axe to grind? In this case, it's true. She lost an argument internally and has decided to paint SUN's view of things differently than it really is. Just because a person is a former employee does not make their statement trustworthy.
GPL compatability is a farce at best, since to be GPL-compatible esentially means that your code can be re-licensed under the GPL, which precludes the original author from using any further contributions (which is rather unfair).
So... are you Joerg, or are you his buddy the xcdroast author?
Reading my past posting history, it should be obvious that I am an American and have English as my first language. Whereas, if you read Joerg's posts you can see that he does not speak English fluently. Nice little personal attack there though, is that the way you win all your arguments?
As an FYI, I'm a US citizen, and if you google for eviltypeguy you'll find plenty of references to the things I've worked on or contributed to. I have contributed to many free software projects, including those licensed under the BSD, LGPL, GPL, CDDL and others. Feel free to actually research your claims.
Well, I will: Joerg is moderately capable. His advantage is that he personally owns many expensive and out-of-production burners, and that his employer (the lovely MP3 patent holders) he has an unusual ability to get vendors to cooperate in giving out hardware information under NDA.
*sarcasm* Then surely with all the other superior technically capable people out there, they could have done so much more than Joerg by now. *sarcasm*
I don't believe for a moment that lack of access to equipment is the only thing holding people back. How long has Joerg been working on cdrtools now? (10-15 years???) How many people have had a chance to do the same work as him but have not? You can't convince me that in all that time no one else had the opportunity to do this.
Anyone who kept track of Joerg Schilling, and his prominent ego, was able to clearly see the inevitable fork from quite a distance away. Schilling was another one of those types -- like the dude who was running some obscure piece of code known as xfree86 -- whose success and prominence as the author of a popular free software package went completely into his head.
If that's all it was, then why has no one else been able to create an equivalent tool to Joerg's?
You make it sound like Joerg was all hot air, and not a extremely technically cable person.
No, this should not be suprising news to anyone who's been following LKML. You could've predicted this a long time ago. What is really interesting here is the revelation that Sun explicitly made CDDL intentionally incompatible with GPL.
It's only a revelation to those who believe it. Thankfully there are those who know better. Danese Cooper was no longer a SUN employee as of March 2005. Her words (from after that) are therefore not representative of SUN.
Reading this just underscores the fact that you just can't trust Sun, and nobody should hold their breath on account of Java.
Ah yes, let the conspiracy theories begin! The same sad old song. Despite the fact that SUN has released more code than any other company under *free* and *open source* software licenses they're to blame for everything.
It's funny because when the Apache Software Foundation has a license that is incompatible with the GPL, no one gave them grief, but SUN moves to one and suddenly they're evil...
The real problem here is NOT the CDDL, Apache License, etc. The real problem is the GPL. There are many licenses classified as *free software* by the FSF that are incompatible. What makes SUN's any more evil than the other ones? If Richard's (RMS) criteria for what is free software isn't good enough to make all *free software* licenses compatible, then perhaps his criteria is wrong?
What Danese Cooper says is wrong. I and many other members of the OpenSolaris project know for certain that SUN did not create the CDDL to be purposefully incompatible with the GPL. SUN even releases other software under the GPL and LGPL.
It is also important to note that Danese Cooper's employment with SUN ended in March of 2005 (http://blogs.sun.com/DaneseCooper/). This means that any statements made by her are not officially representative of SUN. Conspiracy theorists are free to believe what they wish.
In addition, what the maintainers have failed to mention is that they have repatedly introduced patches to the codebase that have broken or otherwise caused problems in the cdrtools codebase. They need help because they don't know how to maintain cdrtools properly.
In addition, there are currently problems with Debian's Free Software Guidelines. Notably that the project does not consistently enforce them because many rules are not explicitly written, instead each software is judged on a case-by-case interpretation making it difficult for upstream developers to comply and those interpretations themselves are not always consistent. If you want proof of this, just read the various flame wars on debian-legal, etc.
They also forgot to mention that they have been very good to the community by also releasing some of the core components used to make Puzzle Pirates under a Free Software license:
I know many people that would be considered "rich," -- that is six figure income or much higher at the very least. Not one of them are people that push political agendas (from what I've seen) and if anything are philanthropists that benefit their communities greatly.
I myself am not "rich" -- at least I'm not a six figure or higher income person. Most people in the US would consider me "middle class."
The real problem is not being "rich." The real problem is that money actually allows people to change the decisions of politicians that are supposed to be representing the people. There will always be money, favors, or some other type of "currency." Getting rid of it won't stop the problem, so getting rid of the corrupt politicians would be the solution.
Um, I have yet to see a production installation of ZFS in an enterprise environment...
Then you haven't been looking very hard. SUN has been using ZFS internally in their enterprise environment for a while. In addition, there are several special customers that were using ZFS in production working closely with SUN engineers. Not only that, I know of a hosting company that posted about using ZFS already for their production environment. In addition, ZFS is now officially supported and part of Solaris 10 as of Update 2, so there are definitely many production installations already. If you read the ZFS discussion forums on opensolaris.org, you will see a lot of posts from people that have already set up ZFS installations in production environments.
Slashdot Mirror
If it was just text editing and not code hinting, folding, anti-aliasing, line counting, syntax checking, and a bunch of other things all at the same time -- I might agree with that. However, in this case, I think you're misusing John's quote.
Bzzzt. Wrong. The GPLv2 has an implicit patent license; the GPLv3 has an explicit; there is not really a large difference as far as licensing patents that go with the code is concerned. In Sun's case, it would be the same.
Also, they didn't "pay sco" in the way you are implying; they *licensed* technology from SCO that they needed to support their customers since they were *legally* bound to do so. Let's not twist the truth so far shall we?
That's wrong. Actually the latest version of the SCA explicitly promises that contributions will remain under a free software license. Also, it is *joint* ownership. Which means you still have all the rights you did before to the code, it's just that Sun gets all of the same rights too.
Incorrect.
s /2006-October/000356.html
Solaris now has DRI support for chips such as the Intel 915 since October of last year at least:
http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/xwin-discus
"The Dev team even admitted the SP campaign was pure crap! That right there says quite a lot." The Dev team said no such thing as far as I am aware. Please provide your source for this statement. Then you are either: 1) Inexperienced gamer or 2) Have a very low thresh-hold for enjoyment Assumptions tend to get people in trouble. I have been gaming on the PC since the early 1980's. My threshold for enjoyment is "not very low" -- it's just that I happen to thoroughly enjoy the story and artwork in the original NWN. I have hundreds of PC game titles on my shelves, some good, some bad.
I never said I enjoyed NWN "over" prior games, just that I enjoyed it. Although there are some prior games I didn't enjoy as much. For example, I never could bring myself to finish Baldur's Gate I, even though I finished NWN I. Why? I just wanted to play it for the story and quests, I didn't want to control each individual member of my party. Your preference to do so, and insinuation that it is a inclination towards mediocrity is a opinion not shared by the general gaming public at best.
Before you accuse me of not understanding or being a true D&D fan, yes, I do have the Player's Handbook, etc.
Of course but because something is popular doesn't make it good. I'm not the only one that feels that gaming is backsliding into mediocrity.
Businesses exist to make money. Game developers make games. Therefore it follows that they make games their public wants to play because that makes money. If people want to play games that folks like you see a mediocre, then more power to the game developers for making them. Life is too short to take things that seriously. Fun is fun. There's a reason that Nintendo is so successful right now, and its because they aren't catering to Ivory Tower gamers like you.
That is your opinion.
I for one sincerely enjoyed the original campaign, it wasn't the *best* I've ever played, but it was very enjoyable for me.
I think too many people say the community is what saved NWN.
Bioware's internal surveys and statistics always indicated that the singleplayer portion of NWN was far more popular.
It's one of the reasons they launched the Premium Modules program (which was very successful until Atari killed it).
Kill me later for this, but let me be the first to say:
"Snakes in a server room!"
*ducks*
But not with a popular license. I'm not interested in hacking on a CDDL-licensed Java. A GPL3'ed Java, yes.
Newsflash! Java is GPLv2; not CDDL. Research before posting. Thanks.
No one has proven that is an effective capitalist tool for all types of software though.
For example, no one in the gaming industry has yet tried this approach from the outset.
The closest example would be iD Software's GPLing of various components years after commercial viability of an engine, but that doesn't really count...
Ian is one employee of *thousands* that work on Solaris. He does not dictate the official direction or what is included in Solaris. So his project is just that -- a project among hundreds at Sun that involves Solaris.
So it doesn't really matter what Ian decided to do with his project, unless the rest of the teams decide to adopt his work, and the community does too, what he says or does doesn't mean squat.
Actually, many of the local libraries in the city where he burned them won't take donated books. I don't know why, but last I was told, it was something to do with liability. I know, I donated some books in hopes to see them put on the shelves for others, but instead even though they were in mint condition, they were sold for a mere pittance at the library bookstore to raise money to buy other books :(
We can't help it if our older population doesn't drop their bovine excrement where it belongs.
As Taurens get older, they lose control.
How silly would a Tauren wearing a diaper look?
One word: cfengine
http://www.cfengine.org/
OpenSolaris is open source and *free software* minus a few encumbered portions, just like Java. So I'm uncertain as to what you are referring to.
I don't know what you mean by that, but I clearly stated who said it and where it was posted from.
That's one way to look at it. My own experience is that it's far more likely the former employee simply no longer has a vested interest in hiding the ugly truth about their former employer's methods, motivations, or prectices.
In this case, what she said is known to not be true, so it's an axe to grind. Mystery solved.
That doesn't make her right, even if she was the primary author, and I have never seen anything listing her as the primary author. In addition, even Simon Phipps of SUN has stated that what she said was not correct:
http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?messa
Is your point that we should trust "official" statements by a corporation more than we should trust the statements of a former employee? If so, I don't see why we should accept that.
Maybe because former employers are more likely to have an axe to grind? In this case, it's true. She lost an argument internally and has decided to paint SUN's view of things differently than it really is. Just because a person is a former employee does not make their statement trustworthy.
GPL compatability is a farce at best, since to be GPL-compatible esentially means that your code can be re-licensed under the GPL, which precludes the original author from using any further contributions (which is rather unfair).
So... are you Joerg, or are you his buddy the xcdroast author?
Reading my past posting history, it should be obvious that I am an American and have English as my first language. Whereas, if you read Joerg's posts you can see that he does not speak English fluently. Nice little personal attack there though, is that the way you win all your arguments?
As an FYI, I'm a US citizen, and if you google for eviltypeguy you'll find plenty of references to the things I've worked on or contributed to. I have contributed to many free software projects, including those licensed under the BSD, LGPL, GPL, CDDL and others. Feel free to actually research your claims.
Well, I will: Joerg is moderately capable. His advantage is that he personally owns many expensive and out-of-production burners, and that his employer (the lovely MP3 patent holders) he has an unusual ability to get vendors to cooperate in giving out hardware information under NDA.
*sarcasm* Then surely with all the other superior technically capable people out there, they could have done so much more than Joerg by now. *sarcasm*
I don't believe for a moment that lack of access to equipment is the only thing holding people back. How long has Joerg been working on cdrtools now? (10-15 years???) How many people have had a chance to do the same work as him but have not? You can't convince me that in all that time no one else had the opportunity to do this.
Anyone who kept track of Joerg Schilling, and his prominent ego, was able to clearly see the inevitable fork from quite a distance away. Schilling was another one of those types -- like the dude who was running some obscure piece of code known as xfree86 -- whose success and prominence as the author of a popular free software package went completely into his head.
If that's all it was, then why has no one else been able to create an equivalent tool to Joerg's?
You make it sound like Joerg was all hot air, and not a extremely technically cable person.
No, this should not be suprising news to anyone who's been following LKML. You could've predicted this a long time ago. What is really interesting here is the revelation that Sun explicitly made CDDL intentionally incompatible with GPL.
It's only a revelation to those who believe it. Thankfully there are those who know better. Danese Cooper was no longer a SUN employee as of March 2005. Her words (from after that) are therefore not representative of SUN.
Reading this just underscores the fact that you just can't trust Sun, and nobody should hold their breath on account of Java.
Ah yes, let the conspiracy theories begin! The same sad old song. Despite the fact that SUN has released more code than any other company under *free* and *open source* software licenses they're to blame for everything.
It's funny because when the Apache Software Foundation has a license that is incompatible with the GPL, no one gave them grief, but SUN moves to one and suddenly they're evil...
The real problem here is NOT the CDDL, Apache License, etc. The real problem is the GPL. There are many licenses classified as *free software* by the FSF that are incompatible. What makes SUN's any more evil than the other ones? If Richard's (RMS) criteria for what is free software isn't good enough to make all *free software* licenses compatible, then perhaps his criteria is wrong?
What Danese Cooper says is wrong. I and many other members of the OpenSolaris project know for certain that SUN did not create the CDDL to be purposefully incompatible with the GPL. SUN even releases other software under the GPL and LGPL.
It is also important to note that Danese Cooper's employment with SUN ended in March of 2005 (http://blogs.sun.com/DaneseCooper/). This means that any statements made by her are not officially representative of SUN. Conspiracy theorists are free to believe what they wish.
In addition, what the maintainers have failed to mention is that they have repatedly introduced patches to the codebase that have broken or otherwise caused problems in the cdrtools codebase. They need help because they don't know how to maintain cdrtools properly.
In addition, there are currently problems with Debian's Free Software Guidelines. Notably that the project does not consistently enforce them because many rules are not explicitly written, instead each software is judged on a case-by-case interpretation making it difficult for upstream developers to comply and those interpretations themselves are not always consistent. If you want proof of this, just read the various flame wars on debian-legal, etc.
Bookpool has it even cheaper ($32.95 USD).
They also forgot to mention that they have been very good to the community by also releasing some of the core components used to make Puzzle Pirates under a Free Software license:
http://www.threerings.net/code/narya/
(GPL)
I know many people that would be considered "rich," -- that is six figure income or much higher at the very least. Not one of them are people that push political agendas (from what I've seen) and if anything are philanthropists that benefit their communities greatly.
I myself am not "rich" -- at least I'm not a six figure or higher income person. Most people in the US would consider me "middle class."
The real problem is not being "rich." The real problem is that money actually allows people to change the decisions of politicians that are supposed to be representing the people. There will always be money, favors, or some other type of "currency." Getting rid of it won't stop the problem, so getting rid of the corrupt politicians would be the solution.
Then you haven't been looking very hard. SUN has been using ZFS internally in their enterprise environment for a while. In addition, there are several special customers that were using ZFS in production working closely with SUN engineers. Not only that, I know of a hosting company that posted about using ZFS already for their production environment. In addition, ZFS is now officially supported and part of Solaris 10 as of Update 2, so there are definitely many production installations already. If you read the ZFS discussion forums on opensolaris.org, you will see a lot of posts from people that have already set up ZFS installations in production environments.