On 08/23/11 12:17, Tomas Bodzar wrote: ... > OpenBSD is really clear about its policy, but do you think that it's > really possible to port stuff this way and made it available as > module without need for change of license or worrying about shark > suits?
"porting" stuff isn't the issue, usually. OpenBSD doesn't avoid importing new GPL, CDDL, etc. code because the code can't be imported into the OpenBSD project by the terms of the proposed code, OpenBSD avoids importing other licenses because it limits the utility of OpenBSD, and the ability to be used for any purpose the user desires. Could OpenBSD "import" ZFS in one of many ways? Sure. Could you use it in all the ways you could use OpenBSD now? No. YOU, the user, are the one who has to worry about the sharks. It's about YOU, not the code. > Thx > > PS: No flame at all. I just think that this situation can be > interesting regarding future because of mixing licenses in some of > systems which are not so strict about license policy yeah, you gotta wonder about that. No, really, you don't. Those that tell you it is about "Freedom" are mostly full of shit. It's about "it didn't cost me anything" to most of them. Watch a person's actions, not their words. They can chant all they want about "freedom", but when they willingly stick their hands in the cuffs because it's easier in the short term, their actions have spoken, it's about the effort, not the freedom. They can chant all they want about the "perfection" of their license, but when they freely contaminate it with other license with more restrictions, they have shown their real motivation. ZFS is cool, don't get me wrong. But...by making it such a core part of what makes FreeBSD special, FreeBSD is no longer BSD-free...it's CDDL or whatever the Oracle sharks (which make the Sun sharks look sane) want it to be-free. Maybe that's good enough for you, maybe it isn't. YOU have to pay the lawyers to figure it out, though, not FreeBSD. With something like ZFS, you have two choices: 1) keep it as a "side" project, like OpenBSD does with Chrome, Firefox, etc. You can build an OpenBSD-based product without any of those things..by not adding the packages. But for something like a file system...do you really want to bet your data on a file system treated like a bastard step-child, tested by only a few users, and not really core to the system? A file system isn't a browser. When your browser crashes, well, we are all used to that (says something right there, doesn't it?). You don't want your file system working that way, do you? 2) Embrace the product, use it everywhere, assume the user will base their solutions on it. In that case...the project is now effectively FreeCDDL and NetCDDL. That's fine if that's what they want (obviously, they do) and they go in eyes open (not so sure about that). Nick.
