> And in the end one of them dies because they're exactly the same thing. > I really don't see what the point of GPLing OpenSolaris would be.
Maybe so the one that dies out isn't OpenSolaris?
I posted about this elsewhere in this discussion, but what if OpenSolaris goes GPL3? Along with GCC, libc, GDB, Emacs, etc. etc.? Linux is very likely *not* going GPLv3. Which kernel do you think would fare better as the free software kernel of choice to be distributed with GNU?
Well well well. This is a rather interesting kettle of fish now isn't it?
With it looking like Linus and company are going to be averse to GPL3 (to wit, they very likely couldn't go GPL3 even if they *wanted* to), what if -- just "what if", mind you -- OpenSolaris began plans to go GPLv3? Hm. I wonder... GNU/Solaris?
That would be something, now wouldn't it? I wonder if you'd see the FSF (and a fair portion of the rest of the free software community) jump on OpenSolaris an the preferred free software kernel for GNU? (Ahem -- until HURD is ready, of course).
> If a company can spend less to hire someone from India / Mexico / wherever, why on earth > should we stop them? Why should they be forced to pay more money to hire someone from the > US? This is utterly against the spirit of the free market.
The point you seem to be missing is that it's a *U.S.* company we're talking about here. They owe their success to the infrastructure upon which their business is based. It's our (all us citizens) tax money that pays for everything that enables their business to operate (roads, public works, and so on).
They can't have their cake and eat it too.
Now, the real trouble begins when we start talking about multi-nationals...
Slashdot Mirror
> And in the end one of them dies because they're exactly the same thing.
> I really don't see what the point of GPLing OpenSolaris would be.
Maybe so the one that dies out isn't OpenSolaris?
I posted about this elsewhere in this discussion, but what if OpenSolaris goes GPL3? Along with GCC, libc, GDB, Emacs, etc. etc.? Linux is very likely *not* going GPLv3. Which kernel do you think would fare better as the free software kernel of choice to be distributed with GNU?
Well well well. This is a rather interesting kettle of fish now isn't it?
With it looking like Linus and company are going to be averse to GPL3 (to wit, they very likely couldn't go GPL3 even if they *wanted* to), what if -- just "what if", mind you -- OpenSolaris began plans to go GPLv3? Hm. I wonder... GNU/Solaris?
That would be something, now wouldn't it? I wonder if you'd see the FSF (and a fair portion of the rest of the free software community) jump on OpenSolaris an the preferred free software kernel for GNU? (Ahem -- until HURD is ready, of course).
Very interesting prospects indeed.
> If a company can spend less to hire someone from India / Mexico / wherever, why on earth
> should we stop them? Why should they be forced to pay more money to hire someone from the
> US? This is utterly against the spirit of the free market.
The point you seem to be missing is that it's a *U.S.* company we're talking about here. They owe their success to the infrastructure upon which their business is based. It's our (all us citizens) tax money that pays for everything that enables their business to operate (roads, public works, and so on).
They can't have their cake and eat it too.
Now, the real trouble begins when we start talking about multi-nationals...