<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 8:43 AM, David Nalley <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:david@gnsa.us" target="_blank">david@gnsa.us</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="im">On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 11:30 AM, Greg DeKoenigsberg<br>
<<a href="mailto:greg.dekoenigsberg@eucalyptus.com">greg.dekoenigsberg@eucalyptus.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> No sense in making a move to permissive licensing unless there's a<br>
> plan to go with it.<br>
><br>
<br>
</div>This.<br>
<br>
There needs to be a plan around it. There needs to be a real<br>
justification; ignoring my experience, and even our preferences -<br>
what's the project justification for such a painful change. Change for<br>
change's sake is awful.<br>
JMW is probably closer to this than most - but are there people who<br>
have objected to using gluster on the license grounds? Objected to<br>
contributing to gluster because of licensing? Perhaps a good place to<br>
look is deals where a competitor to Gluster has been chosen.</blockquote></div><br><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">I don't have much experience in this realm but from what I know its a big deal and can be disastrous if done incorrectly. I agree with David's statement above, there needs to be a solid reason for the move, a plan and community support behind it.</div>
<div><br></div>-- <br><div dir="ltr"><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif">Lance Albertson</font><div><div><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif">Director</font></div><div><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">Oregon State University | </span><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">Open Source Lab </span></div>
</div></div>
</div></div>