From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 03:56:35 +0000
From: G. David Butler gdb@dbSystems.com
Subject: [9fans] Plan 9 future
Topicbox-Message-UUID: aa4e78a4-eac8-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025
Message-ID: <20000512035635.x4p2PLh1nVGsC7hl4DruRZN1NDoxU4C1qJWC7-cmQVI@z>

Again waiting for this thread to idle (and watching with even
further amusement the discussions of U*NIX's history; brace
styles, that was good), I would like to continue the discussion
of commercial use of Plan 9.

Even though most of us agree with Jim Choate that an Open Source
model would be the most attractive to everybody except Lucent
stock holders, the reality is that the most we can hope for is
reasonable terms to use the ideas and code in Plan 9.

There are two primary reasons I champion the use of Plan 9:

- I greatly respect the contributions of Bell Labs researchers
and if I had to bet on a new successful computing paradigm, it
would be theirs.

- The code is written and I believe there are patents.  The
easiest way to take advantage of them is to purchase them.  Also,
after looking at way too much *BSD and Linux code (and I use that
term loosely) it is refreshing to read the mostly clear, precise
and well designed code that is in Plan 9.  In fact, a very large
reason for me staying away from every other "free" system out
there is the awlful spaghetti known as the GNU C compiler.  I have
looked very hard at Amoeba for that very reason and it is too bad
that the source to the C compiler is not included in that
distribution.

In any case, given that an Open Source model is not an option, how
do we proceed?

==================================================

Lucio De Re <lucio@proxima.alt.za> wrote:

>> Access to commercial use sublicenses.
>>
>I wonder if drawing a line at this point would not give us additional
>scope.  Membership up to, but not including this point would be,
>tentatively, implicit in being on a mailing list, whereas this
>access may require a subscription fee.

Actually, to have access to code would incur the membership fee
as there has to be some way to define "membership."  To do otherwise
would be to deny Lucent revenue from source sales (the book.)

>> How should the Club be governed?
>>
>A board of trustees.  It's the only mechanism I have come across
>that eliminates vested interests :-)  But it is only a semi-serious
>suggestion, it may be too complex for the purpose.

Or a board of directors (it is a corporation.)  We *want* them to
have a vested interest in the owners' (the members'?) interests.

>> Would members be compensated for their code contributions?  How?
>>
>Too difficult to do by default.  Members may ask for compensation
>and refrain from providing the contribution, so it would be desirable
>to have some funds for such

I was thinking the members could submit code in exchange for dues
and the usual recognition that goes along with this kind of thing
("The Cathedral and the Bazaar").

>> Long Live Plan 9!
>>
>Oh, I bet it will!!  Thanks, David, you have done well beyond the
>call of duty in this, no matter what your claimed objectives may be.

My claimed objectives?  I didn't know I had any.  I have often
wondered how things would have been if UNIX was licensed by someone
that didn't give a hoot whether a dime of money was made, but instead
wanted to further the spread of a great system just for its own sake.
Imagine UNIX on the x386 in '85 that was supported by the users of
the system for only the the *cost* of the license to AT&T and only
if you used it commercially?  How would things look now?  I guess
the problem is that anybody that can finance the redistribution
license must have a business plan and that plan must include
making money.

Well in my case, I don't have a plan (I financed this personally).
Perhaps I would like to see just how much of a mess I can make in
the software world and see Microsnot go to [bleep].  Sure Lucent
wins, but I think that is a small price to pay for the quality
of the code and research we get.  In addition, enhancements to
the system that we create may be licensed back to Lucent in the
future, perhaps nullifying the effect of the money deal.
We will never know if we don't try.

And one last thing, I expect that the Club would be totally owned
by the members at some point.  How and when that would happen
would be decided before the first membership fee was accepted.

David Butler
gdb@dbSystems.com