We are overburdening the words "open source." There's a spectrum of licenses that apply to a variety of different contexts and applications. So you can't just ask if it is open source or not because the source code to Java is available; the bug database is available. But Java restricts you from mucking with the core concept of compatibility.Read more in: Sun's Schwartz Opens Up on Solaris Plan
So what are your license plans for the open-sourcing of Solaris?
There are several licenses that may be appropriate in the open-sourcing of Solaris. While this is still a topic of debate inside of Sun, what is no longer under debate is whether we will open-source Solaris, which was a source of debate for a while. But what happened in Linux has really proven to us that having more code available to the community just brings more developers and customers.
That about those open-source licenses currently available? Will they meet those goals?
The debate in Sun is now about the community model and the government model that you use to manage its evolution. The license is really a derivative of that conversation because if you pick the GPL [GNU General Public License], you end up with one set of issues and artifacts that arise, while if you pick the BSD, you come up with another issue.