Interview: Danese Cooper, Sun Microsystems, Inc.
2002-10-14
Louis Suárez-Potts: Danese Cooper is Sun's Open Source Programs 経営者／支配人 and arguably , as May's slashdot Q & A would 示す, one of the more 影響力のある 発言する／表明するs in Open Source today. That's because in the last two years the nature of Open Source has 発展させるd as more 会社／団体s have entered the game, such as IBM, の中で others. Open Source is ますます a 基金d 法人組織の／企業の 戦略. And in this game, Sun is, in many ways, the most committed of the players to the logic of Open Source. It 現在／一般に is supporting not only OpenOffice.org, but also several other important Open Source 成果／努力s,such a 事業／計画（する） Jxta, Netbeans, Jini, and others. These 代表する very 重要な 投資s. Sun, in short, is 支払う／賃金ing more than lip service to Open Source.
Danese Cooper: Amen!
Take Scott McNealy's speech at the 最近の Linux World Expo. In the 基本方針, OpenOffice.org was 特記する／引用するd no より小数の than five times by my count as emblemizing the success of Open Source 事業／計画（する）s. But OpenOffice.org is unique in that, like Mozilla, it 申し込む／申し出s endusers something they can get their 手渡すs on. So the 裏書，是認 raises some 利益／興味ing questions: In what ways has OpenOffice.org's success の中で endusers changed the way in which Sun 見解（をとる）s Open Source 事業／計画（する）s?
OpenOffice.org spent most of its first year as a curious 実験 in the 注目する，もくろむs of many (but certainly not all) of Sun (n)役員／(a)執行力のあるs. It cost a lot of money to create and support and then we were giving it away! But the success of OpenOffice.org is very 納得させるing. It wildly 越えるd 配当 発射／推定s, which was a problem at first because of the cost of the bandwidth 消費するd in serving the binaries, but is now hugely helped by the volunteer mirroring system. Then Sun was approached by a group of 可能性のある 使用者s of StarOfficeTM (our Sun-branded distro of OpenOffice.org) who 現実に preferred to 支払う／賃金 money for it. So now we 告発（する），告訴（する）／料金 a small 量 for StarOffice and sell 企業 Support 契約s 同様に. Finally everyone at Sun can see how growing a 幅の広い base of ubiquity can 運動 sales of branded and supported 見解／翻訳／版s of the same ソフトウェア.
As a follow-up, how has the growth and size and enduser character of OpenOffice.org 影響する／感情d its 初めの goals? (I'm thinking here that two years ago, when we first 開始する，打ち上げるd the code, we never imagined that OpenOffice.org would be the way it is today....)
井戸／弁護士席, we never foresaw that the community would 効果的に take over the marketing of OpenOffice.org, but essentially that is what has happened. Community members 準備する very professional (IMHO) marketing collateral and then translate it into 地元の languages to reach a much larger market than StarOffice could ever reach with only Sun doing the marketing on a cost/利益 basis. 事前の to OpenOffice.org, Open Source 事業／計画（する）s were only considered successful if 得点する／非難する／２０s of Open Source developers showed up to 高める the codebase, but OpenOffice.org redefined Open Source success in a way. It makes me think that perhaps the true 利益 of Open Source is not "解放する／自由な 工学" as ESR (Eric S. Raymond) has 主張するd in his writings, but rather the tight feedback 宙返り飛行 that 許すs 使用者s to give nearly instant 返答s as new features are 器具／実施するd.
I'd like to 焦点（を合わせる） on licensing 問題／発行するs: OpenOffice.org recently changed its licensing structure. Does this structure now 得る for other 事業／計画（する）s? And, perhaps more importantly, what are the 関わりあい／含蓄s for Sun (and for the community) of the new 共同の copyright assignment form? That is, how will it change a developer's approach to working on OpenOffice.org (or any other Sun OS 事業／計画（する）)?
Community member's 関心s over the 要求するd assignment of copyright on community 出資／貢献s to Sun 納得させるd us to 研究 and 結局 author the 共同の Copyright Assignment, which is a big 改良 over the old 協定 because it 許すs contributors to 保持する 初めの 権利s to their work and only asks them to 会談する a copy of those 権利s to Sun.
Copyright Assignment is a hot topic just now in the world of Open Source! Most of the traditions of Open Source have at their root a 深遠な hacker 願望（する） to "be done with 法人組織の／企業の tyranny" in the form of lawyers and marketeers who get in the way of "just coding." For this 推論する／理由, the 早期に large 事業／計画（する）s with 法人組織の／企業の 後援 (like Mozilla) made a practice of NOT collecting copyrights with 出資／貢献s. Mozilla ran into trouble when it later decided to change licensing 条件 from a 二重の license to a tri-license to attract 解放する／自由な ソフトウェア 支持するs (and 含む the GPL family). Since they didn't have all the copyrights, they were 直面するd with a 窮地. How could they get 許可 from ALL the many contributors to the codebase? Under US copyright 法律, every contributor must give 許可, and of course even finding them all was a challenge (they now have around 90% 許可s)! The result is that some of the Mozilla codebase is tri-licensed and some of it is not.
Sun chose to collect copyright assignments for OpenOffice.org on the advice of Richard Stallman. He 支持するd the 二重の-licensing 計画／陰謀 for OpenOffice.org and pointed out that the only way to manage it was to collect copyrights. Every Sun-sponsored Open Source 事業／計画（する） since OpenOffice.org has had a copyright assignment 構成要素 同様に. We are now working to 変える those communities to use the 共同の Copyright Assignment because it is fairer to those community (and also makes more sense in the 状況 of the European Union 法律s on copyright).
I think the JCA should （疑いを）晴らす up developer 関心s over giving 出資／貢献s to Sun-sponsored 事業／計画（する）s. I'm hoping that the JCA, together with the 設立 of a Community 会議 (which is moving 今後) and the 解放（する） 会議 will help those contributors who want to be more 伴う／関わるd in the 進化 of the 事業／計画（する） find 入ること／参加（者） points to 深くする their 関与.
政府: I'd like to turn to an area that has lately 獲得するd a tremendous 量 of 利益／興味, OpenOffice.org and Open Source in 政府. In the US there are a few (議論の的になる) movements to 要求する 地元の 政府s to use Open Source ソフトウェア (OSS), and throughout the world, there is Peru; and many other 明言する／公表する 政府s are 審議ing the switch to OSS and away from proprietary ソフトウェア. You will be …に出席するing the Open Source for E-政府 会議／協議会 in Washington, DC, this October. If it is not too 早期に to ask, what are the 問題／発行するs you will be 演説（する）／住所ing?
They've asked me to 現在の on OpenOffice.org and also to 参加する on a パネル盤 with other members of large ソフトウェア 産業 会社／団体s on Open Source. I speak all over the world on these two 支配するs, so I imagine the questions will be 類似の to those I've heard before (含むd here with short answers):
Why is Sun so 伴う／関わるd in Open Source?
Because it matches our motto "協力する on 基準s; 勝利，勝つ on 実施". 法案 Joy has long 持続するd that "革新 Happens どこかよそで" and since our 利益／興味 is to help 科学（工学）技術 move 今後 (not to lock-in our 顧客s) it makes sense that Sun would be 深く，強烈に committed to work in ways that foster 革新 and ubiquity of 広大な／多数の／重要な 科学（工学）技術 while 許すing 顧客 choice.
Can you 述べる the methodology used on Sun-sponsored Open Source 事業／計画（する）s?
Publish the code in 公然と accessible CVS trees under one or more Open Source licenses. 行為／行う 開発 transparently. Do your best to answer questions from the community and to 受託する community input. Make all bugs and their status public. Encourage 再使用する of the code in 推定する／予想するd and 予期しない ways. Publish roadmaps and wish 名簿（に載せる）／表（にあげる）s so the community knows where to 申し込む／申し出 援助. Periodically brand-包む a 見解／翻訳／版 of the code to which you 適用する 深い QA, 与える／捧げるing all 直す／買収する，八百長をするs 支援する to the CVS trees. 申し込む／申し出 support 契約s and other value 追加するs on the brand-wrapped 見解／翻訳／版.
Can you explain the differences between Open Source licenses?
Yes, but it isn't a short answer ;-)...I'd like to think we've explained the licenses cogent to OpenOffice.org pretty 井戸／弁護士席 in the FAQs. The larger question of why there are so many licenses is a 堅い one. Its a real problem in Open Source that the license wars continue to segregate codebases from each other. 二重の-licensing or Tri-licensing is one way to get around the problem, but the 行政 of multi-licenses is not 平易な either. Many of us who 支持する for 解放する／自由な and Open Source have 手配中の，お尋ね者 to work on a 解答 to this basic problem (for instance Organizations like OSI are trying to create "template" licenses which can be 再使用するd to （疑いを）晴らす up some of the 混乱), but even in this we are 現在／一般に divided. In a real sense this may be the biggest problem.
How are modifications to Open Source ソフトウェア 文書d?
The history is all 持続するd within the 事業／計画（する）. You can see the checkins by subscribing to a mail 名簿（に載せる）／表（にあげる）, or you can 研究 them 地位，任命する-facto in the CVS histories. Likewise the mail 名簿（に載せる）／表（にあげる）s and bug databases are 明白な and 古記録d. This is basic to Open Source methodology, as it saves having to train new community members (be they Sun 従業員s or not). Newbies can reasonably be pointed at the 古記録s to do their learning.
How can we 文書 the 質 of Open Source ソフトウェア (this is important in 規制するd 産業s)?
This is a 比較して new consideration for me, and I think its 価値（がある） について言及するing here. It is ありふれた in 規制するd 産業s to 需要・要求する that 生産者s of 製品s which 影響する／感情 public health or safety (for instance 核の 力／強力にする 工場／植物s) must 文書 all systems associated with the 創造 or 配達／演説／出産 of the 製品. It is NOT part of the Open Source ethic to （判断の）基準 and 文書 質 in the same way that proprietary 金物類／武器類 (and ソフトウェア) is typically 文書d. That it is NOT 文書d is part of the 推論する／理由 it is low cost. There is 現在／一般に tremendous 経済的な 圧力 on all 産業s to 簡素化する 生産／産物 costs, and of course they are looking at Open Source ソフトウェア. But in 規制するd 産業s they can't use ソフトウェア that hasn't been 実証するd as having 十分な 質 (not just how 衝突，墜落-proof it is, but how reliably does it 成し遂げる 仕事s without altering 批判的な content?). I think this is probably a 商売／仕事 適切な時期 to 実証する 質 on 基準 Open Source distros and sell that as a value-追加する, but of course there would be an incremental cost which would have to also cover the 義務／負債 incurred by warranty. 利益／興味ing thing to think about in any 事例／患者.
What 肉親，親類d of warranties are 利用できる on Open Source ソフトウェア?
事実上 all Open Source 事業／計画（する）s (含むing OpenOffice.org) disclaim any 義務／負債 resulting from use. Companies like Sun would say that is this one of the major value-追加するs of brand-wrapped 見解／翻訳／版s like StarOffice: Sun stands behind it.
And the perennial favorite:
What 影響 do you think Open Source will have on the ソフトウェア 産業 over the long 称する，呼ぶ／期間／用語?
I think it is （疑いを）晴らす now that we are looking at nothing いっそう少なく than a 未来 where high-質 組織／基盤／下部構造 ソフトウェア is pervasively 利用できる at no cost to 消費者s and with licensing 条件 which 許す 消費者s to make their own modifications. This 未来 持つ／拘留するs some unknowns, but from my point of 見解（をとる） it looks like 消費者s and even whole countries entering the 科学（工学）技術 age will 利益. Some large companies who have made money by 供給するing this type of ソフトウェア in such a way as to maximize their 利益（をあげる） will be 直面するd with the choice of changing their 商売／仕事 models or 中止するing to 存在する. Sun is working honestly in this new space, and we've been doing so for years now. I think its （疑いを）晴らす that there are things the old proprietary models 許すd (R&D that seeded 予期しない consequences for instance, and also value 追加するs such as 質 validation and resultant warranties appropriate to 規制するd 産業) which Sun is committed to continuing.
