Joerg Schilling wrote: > Tim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> ZFS is licensed under the CDDL, and as far as I know does not require >> derivative works to be open source. It's truly free like the BSD license in >> that companies can take CDDL code, modify it, and keep the content closed. >> They are not forced to share their code. That's why there are "closed" >> patches that go into mainline Solaris, but are not part of OpenSolaris. >> > > The CDDL requires to make modifications public. > > > > >> While you may not like it, this isn't the GPL. >> > > The GPL is more free than many people may believe now ;-) > > The GPL is unfortunately missunderstood by most people. > > The GPL allows you to link GPLd projects against other code > of _any_ other license that does not forbid you some basic things. > This is because the GPL ends at the "work limit". The binary in this > case is just a container for more than one work and the license of > the binary is the aggregation of the requirements of the licenses > in use by the sources. > > > The influence of the CDDL ends at file level. All changes are covered by > the copyleft from the CDDL. >
My apologies to Matt as I didn't expect so much noise over the issue, but mostly for things to be clarified more clearly. If anything positive can still come from this let us know. ./C _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
