On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 10:40 AM, Ray Van Dolson <rvandol...@esri.com>wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 08:35:05AM -0700, Tim Cook wrote: > > No, no they don't. You're under the misconception that they no > > longer own the code just because they released a copy as GPL. That > > is not true. Anyone ELSE who uses the GPL code must release > > modifications if they wish to distribute it due to the GPL. The > > original author is free to license the code as many times under as > > many conditions as they like, and release or not release subsequent > > changes they make to their own code. > > > > I absolutely guarantee Oracle can and likely already has > > dual-licensed BTRFS. > > Well, Oracle obviously would want btrfs to stay as part of the Linux > kernel rather than die a death of anonymity outside of it... > > As such, they'll need to continue to comply with GPLv2 requirements. > > Why would they obviously want that? When the project started, they were competing with Sun. They now own Solaris; they no longer have a need to produce a competing product. I would be EXTREMELY surprised to see Oracle continue to push Linux as hard as they have in the past, over the next 5 years. --Tim
_______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
