> That community is organizing itself bottom-up into the new Plan 9 Foundation, which is making the OS code publicly available under a suitable open-source software license.
Didn't bell-labs already make the source available under the GPL years ago? Why is this necessary?
Bell Labs permitted UC Berkeley to fork and distribute Plan 9 under the GPL, but the main repository was still under the Lucent Public License or something weird like that. Relicensing under the MIT license will maximize the number of people who can use the code, even if the foundation they created does not catch on.
Right, this is why 9front and 9legacy came up and both are pretty well maintained, i hope they (9front) migrate the code "back" to Plan9, would be amazing to have one single point of development.
Didn't bell-labs already make the source available under the GPL years ago? Why is this necessary?