On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 09:51:23 -0600 Brett Glass <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There is a huge problem in that the CDDL is "viral." It "infects" > products with which it is combined. You can read the text of the > CDDL at > > http://www.opensource.org/licenses/cddl1.php > > Section 3.1 of the CDDL is the portion which is essentially equivalent > to the GPL. > > This is part of the nastiness of viral licenses. How is this any worse than the GPLed stuff in /usr/src/contrib? I agree that the CDDL has a viral nature, but the BSD community has been able to work within that framework for years with the GPL without having it "infect" anything else. A kernel module is no different. > > --Brett Glass > > At 07:06 AM 4/14/2007, Philipp Wuensche wrote: > > >Brett Glass wrote: > >> I just read with some concern the announcement that Sun's ZFS has been > >> integrated into the FreeBSD kernel. This would mean, unfortunately, that > >> FreeBSD is now covered by the CDDL, which is a viral license similar to > >> the GPL. Has FreeBSD abandoned its longstanding practice of keeping the > >> kernel truly free? > > > >Maybe this blog entry brings some light: > >http://blogs.sun.com/chandan/entry/copyrights_licenses_and_cddl_illustrated > > > >I don't see a problem. If you use CDDL licensed stuff like ZFS, you need > >to provide the source, thats it. > > > >greetigns, > >philipp > > _______________________________________________ > [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" -- Bill Moran Potential Technologies http://www.potentialtech.com _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
