>>>>> "bf" == Bob Friesenhahn <bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us> writes:
bf> Perhaps it is better for Linux if it is GPLv2, but probably
bf> not if it is GPLv3.
That's my understanding: GPLv3 is the one you would need to preserve
software freedom under deals like NetApp<->Oracle patent pact,
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/rms-why-gplv3.html#patent-protection
but GPLv3 is not compatible with Linux because the kernel is GPLv2 but
stupidly/stubbornly deleted the ``or any later version'' language,
meaning GPLv3 is not any more Linux-compatible than CDDL.
however given how widely-used binary modules are to supposedly get
around the license incompatibility, many might consider the GPLv3
patent protections worth more than license compatibility, if your goal
is software freedom, or a predictable future for your business.
pgphyRH6AbXxf.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
