Keith Bierman wrote:
Not being a lawyer, and this not being a Legal forum ... can we leave license analysis alone?
The GNU _itself_ states that it is not allowable in plain English. Why people continue to argue about it is beyond me :-)
Common Development and Distribution License (CDDL) <http://www.opensolaris.org/os/licensing/cddllicense.txt>
This is a free software license. It has a copyleft with a scope that's similar to the one in the Mozilla Public License, which makes it incompatible with the GNU GPL <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html>. This means a module covered by the GPL and a module covered by the CDDL cannot legally be linked together. We urge you not to use the CDDL for this reason. Also unfortunate in the CDDL is its use of the term "intellectual property <http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/not-ipr.html>". (from http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#SoftwareLicenses) -Brian
_______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
