On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 9:16 PM, Rahul Sundaram <methe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It depends on exactly what FSF knows and how Canonical is planning to do > this. It is not safe to assume FSF is even aware of all the details here. > If you want FSF's opinion, they have a public contact address for > licensing questions and respond pretty quickly. Note that FSF's opinion > although influential does not determine what Fedora legally can ship. That > has to be approved by Red Hat legal as well. > > And ... Fedora does not ship third party kernel modules. > Fedora has it's own rules and can ship or not ship what they want. I'm perfectly fine with that. As I previously stated, IMO BTRFS is a much better choice. My point was simply that I don't believe saying it would be a GPL violation to include ZFS in a Linux distribution is one of them. If it were, I can't imagine Canonical would be doing it.
-- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
