Wednesday Jun 13, 2007
Sunday Jun 03, 2007
By davidleetodd on Jun 03, 2007
You can use this chart to compare the major attributes of the most popular Free and Open Source Software licenses. I have been researching the major licenses, and it's hard to keep the differences between them straight, at least for me, so I prepared this chart that you may find useful. Those of you who know about this subject, please feel free to offer comments. I will revise the chart from time to time in the light of what I learn from you.
|Licenses:||GPL 2||LGPL 2.1||MPL 1.1||CDDL 1.0||CPL 1.0||ECLIPSE 1.0||APACHE 2.0||NEW BSD||MIT|
|Link to other programs under at least some circumstances without creating a derived work||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes|
|As an original author, specify that the same license version be used for future releases, rather than allowing them to use new license versions||Yes|
|If you distribute you are required to:|
|Make source code available||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes|
|Display copyright notice||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes|
|Provide copy of license||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes|
|License modified files within the work under the same terms (“weak copyleft”)||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes|
|License larger derived works under the same terms (“strong copyleft”)||Yes||Yes|
|Indemnify earlier contributors when you offer a warranty of your own||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes|
|Grant licenses for all relevant patents you own||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes|
|If you distribute you are prohibited to:|
|Assert patent claims against the work||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes|
|Assert patent claims against contributors' other software||Yes||Yes|
|Use the names of original authors or contributors in advertising without permission||Yes||Yes|
|Distribute if doing so would be subject to a third-party license||Yes||Yes||Unless you disclose|
|Distribute if doing so would conflict with law or regulation||Yes||Yes||Unless you disclose|
|GPL 2: GNU General Public License, Version 2||Disclaimer: This chart is designed to provide information in regard to the subject matter covered. It is to be understood that the author is not engaged in rendering legal or other professional service. If legal advice or other expert assistance is required, the services of a professional person should be sought. This chart is in no way intended to convey the official position of Sun Microsystems with regard to any software license.|
|LGPL 2.1: GNU Lesser General Public License, Version 2.1|
|MPL 1.1: Mozilla Public License, Version 1.1|
|CDDL 1.0: Common Development and Distribution License, Version 1.0|
|CPL 1.0: Common Public License, Version 1.0|
|ECLIPSE 1.0: Eclipse Public License, Version 1.0|
|APACHE 2.0: Apache License, Version 2.0|
|NEW BSD: The BSD License, 1999 version|
|MIT: The MIT License|
Update 6 June 2007: In response to the kind comment from Mads I have removed the "specify the same license version" clause as an attribute of the Apache License. I am beginning to think that Apache should really be classified as a Permissive license.
Tuesday May 15, 2007
By davidleetodd on May 15, 2007
I drove out to Orange County last week to inspect the startup's new offices. They were pretty impressive, on the fifth floor of a newer highrise. They're definitely planning for future growth -- most of the desks were unoccupied. "Monty," the CIO, showed me around. The hardware is up and running, and it hasn't been moved to their co-location center yet, so I got to see it whirring away. I guess computers haven't been visually impressive since the days of big iron -- today they are just a few slim boxes sitting in a rack that you could wheel into the elevator -- but they do retain an undeniable elegance, a sense that they are the embodiment of an enormous amount of intellectual effort.
Monty and his team have done a terrific job integrating everything in a very short time: HP boxes, Cisco routers, VMware virtualization, Windows operating systems and database, BEA middleware, specialized off-the-shelf mortgage applications. They should be funding their first loan this week, only a few days beyond their original four-month schedule.
There are some key lessons that can be drawn from watching the way this startup came together, lessons both for Sun and for prospective entrepreneurs. Naturally, these are only one man's opinion.
The first is that we are in an era of intense specialization. Monty pulled together both hardware and software from many different vendors, choosing what he saw as best of breed every time. A corollary for a multi-line vendor like Sun is that to appeal to this type of buyer, you have to be among the best in every product line that you hope to sell. If you aren't, you're going to get cherry-picked. Pros like Monty don't set much store by one-stop shopping. The reason is obvious: startups are so inherently risky that their IT crews will do anything they can to mitigate risk, and the best way to do so is to buy what you perceive as the best.
The second lesson is that open source software without a vendor behind it has a huge handicap. Monty thought about using Xen for virtualization, but he went with VMware in the end because it was more expedient, and less risky.
The third lesson is that you can outsource just about everything. Their data center is outsourced. Their HR is outsourced. Their CRM is outsourced. Four of their developers are consultants in India. Their loan docs are scanned into the system by a couple of guys who were sent over by their imaging outsourcer. The ability to outsource so much allows a startup to be up and running in a very short time, and to conserve capital by paying at the point of use. To me, the lesson for Sun is that the data center outsourcing business deserves some serious study. If we can do a Black Box so well, why not a Black Building?
The fourth lesson is that the hypervisor is the new operating system. Both VMware and Xen run on bare metal. All of the startup's applications run in separate instances of Windows, but they all run on the same HP box running VMware, not HP-UX. Sun's support of Solaris on VMware and Xen couldn't have come at a better time. IT theorists make much of the idea that cost-saving server consolidation is behind the explosion in virtualization, but my hunch is that the real reason, at least for a startup, is risk mitigation again. You don't wan't the crash of one application to bring down the whole system.
The fifth lesson is that big ticket IT gear is still sold by human beings, not bought from a catalog. Sun tried hard to get Monty's business, but HP tried just a bit harder. Again, I think that risk mitigation is at the heart of this. Monty wound up buying the hardware through an HP channel partner, and one reason was that the channel partner offered some very valuable consulting services that helped ensure the project's success.
The sixth lesson is that speed is critical. Every day without income burns another tranche of the startup's limited capital, and if you burn through too much of it, you're finished. Running out of capital is the biggest risk of all. Monty made some choices based on what could be up and running quickly, and products and vendors that couldn't deliver results quickly were cast aside.
In the end, it's all about risk. The startup that controls risk effectively will have a better chance of survival, and the vendor that can speedily provide the products and services that mitigate risk will have the best chance at selling to this type of customer.
- Bloggers and the MSM
- Gee, maybe Peak Oil isn't a myth after all
- Who do techies like for President?
- Cool feature on Sun/Texas supercomputer
- Solaris, my evil girlfriend
- White box hackers and Solaris Express Developer Edition
- Rage, rage against the dying of the bandwidth
- Thunderbird annoyances - 1, 2
- Grooving at GOSCON
- In the midst of life
- /Diary of a startup
- /Java CAPS
- /Open Source
- /Product Management
- /StarOffice and OpenOffice.org
- /Who am I?