Subject: Re: Open Source -> Closed Source
From: Santiago Gala <sgala@hisitech.com>
Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 13:09:36 +0200
Wed, 11 May 2005 13:09:36 +0200
El mar, 10-05-2005 a las 17:28 -0600, Anderson, Kelly escribió:
> If an open source project doesn't accept submissions of bug fixes and
> code, they maintain this option to relicense the code under different
> terms. If people have this in the back of their mind, it could slow
> down
> the evolution of an open source project. Also, what constitutes a
> submission? Code only? A bug report? or would a new idea for how to

I refrained from contributing certain patches to kaffe (just to give an
example) and later I abandoned my project modifying it because they
required to give full copyright assignment, which would later inhibit
myself to re-sell my own code under a non-GPL License.

On the other hand, the move that you speak about is only possible for
niche markets. I'm quite sure that if, for instance, ghostscript or gcc
went proprietary, a bunch of people will take it off the point of the
last free license and keep on with development.

BTW, I have stored a copy of the last BSDish licensed of SyncML4j just
in case I need it for mixing/improvements/patching/whatever in the
future.

Regards
-- 
Santiago Gala <sgala@hisitech.com>
High Sierra Technology, SLU


["application/pgp-signature" not shown]