From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <83416f2a277cf262db122a5846f1ed49@plan9.bell-labs.com> From: presotto@plan9.bell-labs.com To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: Re: [9fans] ddc MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="upas-ccmejtsmkwipspxhcowbpwnaxk" Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 14:03:33 -0500 Topicbox-Message-UUID: 185604e6-eacb-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --upas-ccmejtsmkwipspxhcowbpwnaxk Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The weird wording change was indeed someone trying to raise capital with something that got stuck under plan 9. It was an idiotic (closing the barn door after the horses had bolted) move and luckily the lawyers realized it as soon as we got someone with some brains to look at it. Comments from 9fans helped a lot in getting people to review the change. It did have the advantage that it raised such a flap and embarassed enough people that its not likely to happen again. Lucent's woes has caused many researchers to leave. Our lab is showing the strain and we've just been told that we're going to get hit with the next wave of firings. In the last few years we've lost Ken Thompson, Phil Winterbottom, Sean Dorward, and just recently Sean Quinlan, and Rob Pike. All the internal pressure at the moment is to create a more liberal license and dump more stuff under the umbrella so that the people leaving can continue their research elsewhere. The back pressure is just the usual unwillingness to make anything more liberal, the cover your ass philosophy that most large orgs embrace. That back pressure continues to decrease mostly because the number of lawyers is decreasing and those left have better things to do. People afraid to use Plan 9 because of the current license are certainly correct to do so, the IP clause is just too uncomfortable. However, don't expect any changes for the worse. --upas-ccmejtsmkwipspxhcowbpwnaxk Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Received: from plan9.cs.bell-labs.com ([135.104.9.2]) by plan9; Thu Nov 7 13:03:16 EST 2002 Received: from mail.cse.psu.edu ([130.203.4.6]) by plan9; Thu Nov 7 13:03:15 EST 2002 Received: from psuvax1.cse.psu.edu (psuvax1.cse.psu.edu [130.203.30.6]) by mail.cse.psu.edu (CSE Mail Server) with ESMTP id F3E5A19A66; Thu, 7 Nov 2002 13:03:07 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Received: from einstein.ssz.com (unknown [207.200.56.4]) by mail.cse.psu.edu (CSE Mail Server) with ESMTP id 2641D19A17 for <9fans@cse.psu.edu>; Thu, 7 Nov 2002 13:02:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (ravage@localhost) by einstein.ssz.com (8.11.6/8.11.6/SuSE Linux 0.5) with ESMTP id gA7I09922176; Thu, 7 Nov 2002 12:00:10 -0600 From: Jim Choate To: <9fans@cse.psu.edu> Cc: , Subject: Re: [9fans] ddc In-Reply-To: <51a642113bbd07170cd3622ebdb44f50@plan9.bell-labs.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: 9fans-admin@cse.psu.edu Errors-To: 9fans-admin@cse.psu.edu X-BeenThere: 9fans@cse.psu.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu List-Id: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans.cse.psu.edu> List-Archive: Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 12:00:07 -0600 (CST) On Thu, 7 Nov 2002, Russ Cox wrote: > > very list. I'm worried about R4 because that license looks like it may > > prevent a core code split so we won't be able to use any of it, too bad. > > given that the license has gotten less restrictive since r3, > you should feel free to go off and do your code split using r4. > we did r4 with the same license we were using for r3 > at the time. It isn't the wording per se, but the rather weird way it morphed a short while ago. Demonstrates it's unstable and there is some sort of internal conflict in Lucent. Given their financial situation it would not surprise me if the lawyers decided it wouldn't be a nifty way to raise some going out of business capital. Such a situation could create a very serious situation for any user groups or indy developers who happen to jump on the Plan 9 bandwagon. I'm going to cover all my bases for the time being by trying to keep both versions alive. As much of a pain that will be ;) -- ____________________________________________________________________ We don't see things as they are, ravage@ssz.com we see them as we are. www.ssz.com jchoate@open-forge.org Anais Nin www.open-forge.org -------------------------------------------------------------------- --upas-ccmejtsmkwipspxhcowbpwnaxk--