On Tuesday 17 April 2007 09:47:32 Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > On Tue, 17 Apr 2007, Theodore Tso wrote: > [..] > > > Well, that was totally useless answer from the ZFS developers. What > > he should have told you is to contact Sun management, since they are > > the only ones who can decide whether or not to release ZFS under a GPL > > license, and more importantly, to give a patent license for any > > patents they may have filed in the course of developing ZFS. This is > > not anything Linux developers can help you with. > > Realy can't or don't want (?)
As it has been explained to you before it is "can't" > So who is responsible for potential changing Linux code licensing for > allow if not incorporate CDDL code correct interraction without breaking > some law ? If I've parsed this query correctly the answer is: Linux is licensed under the GPL and because a number of people that have contributed code to it can no longer agree to a change in the license because they have died this cannot be changed. That was explained quite clearly in several mails as well. > And/or what Linux can loose on follow this king changes ? > And/or why Linux code licensing can't evolve ? Seems when Linux code was > licensed noone was thinking about case like interraction with code under > license like CDDL so why now it can be corrected and still many people try > to think like "anything arond Linux must evolve .. but not Linux" (?) When Linux was licensed under the GPL there was only *ONE* real choice for licensing it. Linus released the code under the GPL and there it has remained, with Linus leading development. If Linux had *NOT* been released under the GPL it would not be as popular or as powerful as it is - and that is not an opinion but a statement of fact. > Why this can't be fixes ? See the previous statement and several previous mails in this thread. Linux is licensed under the GPL, it is the *only* license agreed to by everyone that has contributed code. If I remember the statistics, there have been something like 10,000 different people that have contributed code. Since each contributor holds the copyright on their code they are the *ONLY* people that could change the license on it. Anyone attempting to change the license without agreement from *everyone* that has contributed code to the kernel they are in violation of US and international copyright laws. > If in this ponit in Linux "evniroment" can't be chaged .. sorry but is it > not kind of hipocritics ? Nope. You've just ignored it when it was explained *why* the existing ZFS code cannot be simply be ported to Linux. If you really need ZFS on linux, might I suggest that you port the code on your own and maintain whatever patches are needed to use it? As it stands ZFS *might* show up in Linux as a from-scratch implementation, although I stress the "might" because there are patents involved. DRH (Now please, drop the subject - IMNSHO it is never going to happen) - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
