Boyd Adamson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Alas, it's not even as simple as that. The author of SQLite, D. Richard
> Hipp, took this approach for reasons like those above. He's said[1] that
> he wouldn't do it again, since there are problems for users in some
> jurisdictions that have no concept of
"David Dyer-Bennet" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, October 7, 2008 09:19, Johan Hartzenberg wrote:
>
>> Wouldn't it be great if programmers could just focus on writing code
>> rather than having to worry about getting sued over whether someone
>> else is able or not to make a derivative prog
On Tue, October 7, 2008 09:19, Johan Hartzenberg wrote:
> Wouldn't it be great if programmers could just focus on writing code
> rather
> than having to worry about getting sued over whether someone else is able
> or not to make a derivative program from their code?
If that's what you want, it's
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 10/07/2008 10:59:06 AM:
> On Tue, 7 Oct 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>>
> >> Wouldn't it be great if programmers could just focus on writing
> >> code rather than having to worry about getting sued over whether
> >> someone else is able or not to make a derivative p
On Tue, 7 Oct 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>>
>> Wouldn't it be great if programmers could just focus on writing
>> code rather than having to worry about getting sued over whether
>> someone else is able or not to make a derivative program from their
>> code?
>
> Yep, but in THIS world it *i
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Yes -- file based and derivative code based (copy covered code to a
> new file and that file is now covered). New code in a new file is not
> automatically covered and the authors choice. That said, if they have
> added dedup to zfs they may have taken extraordin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 10/07/2008 07:15:46 AM:
> Hello Wade,
>
> Monday, October 6, 2008, 8:56:12 PM, you wrote:
>
> WSfc> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 10/06/2008 01:57:10
PM:
>
> >> Hi all
> >>
> >> In another thread a short while ago.. A cool little movie with some
> >> gumballs was all we got
>Some people wrote:
>
>>
>> > covered code. Since Sun owns that code they would need to rattle the
>> > cage. Sun? Anyone have any talks with these guys yet?
>>
>> Isn't CDDL file based so they could implement all the new functionality in
>>
>>
>Wouldn't it be great if programmers could just f
Some people wrote:
>
> > covered code. Since Sun owns that code they would need to rattle the
> > cage. Sun? Anyone have any talks with these guys yet?
>
> Isn't CDDL file based so they could implement all the new functionality in
>
>
Wouldn't it be great if programmers could just focus on writ
Hello Wade,
Monday, October 6, 2008, 8:56:12 PM, you wrote:
WSfc> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 10/06/2008 01:57:10 PM:
>> Hi all
>>
>> In another thread a short while ago.. A cool little movie with some
>> gumballs was all we got to learn about green-bytes. The product
>> launched and maybe some
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.
>> Th
Bob Friesenhahn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The GPL is unfortunately missunderstood by most people.
>
> The GPL is missunderstood due the profusion of confusing technobabble
> such as you provided in your explanation.
If you don't understand it, just don't comment it ;-)
Jörg
--
EMail:[EM
On Mon, 6 Oct 2008, Joerg Schilling wrote:
>> 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 is missunderstood due the profusion of confusing technobabble
such as you
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 co
> On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 3:00 PM, "C. Bergström" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > wrote:
> Matt Aitkenhead wrote:
> > I see that you have wasted no time. I'm still determining if you
> have a sincere interest in working with us or alternatively have an
> axe to grind. The latter is shining through.
> >
> >
On Mon, 6 Oct 2008, Tim 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
It doesn't, but changes made to CDDL-licensed files must be released
(under the CDDL).
> that companies can take C
On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 3:00 PM, "C. Bergström" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> Matt Aitkenhead wrote:
> > I see that you have wasted no time. I'm still determining if you have a
> sincere interest in working with us or alternatively have an axe to grind.
> The latter is shining through.
> >
> > Regard
Matt Aitkenhead wrote:
> I see that you have wasted no time. I'm still determining if you have a
> sincere interest in working with us or alternatively have an axe to grind.
> The latter is shining through.
>
> Regards,
> Matt
>
Hi Matt,
I'd like to make our correspondence in public if you do
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 10/06/2008 01:57:10 PM:
> Hi all
>
> In another thread a short while ago.. A cool little movie with some
> gumballs was all we got to learn about green-bytes. The product
> launched and maybe some of the people that follow this list have had a
> chance to take a look at
Hi all
In another thread a short while ago.. A cool little movie with some
gumballs was all we got to learn about green-bytes. The product
launched and maybe some of the people that follow this list have had a
chance to take a look at the code/product more closely? Wstuart asked
how they wer
20 matches
Mail list logo
