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 code. That's why there are "closed"
> patches that go into mainline Solaris, but are not part of OpenSolaris.
The CDDL requires to make modifications public.
> 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 allows you to link GPLd projects against other code
of _any_ other license that does not forbid you some basic things.
This is because the GPL ends at the "work limit". The binary in this
case is just a container for more than one work and the license of
the binary is the aggregation of the requirements of the licenses
in use by the sources.
The influence of the CDDL ends at file level. All changes are covered by
the copyleft from the CDDL.
The influence of the BSD license ends at line level. The original
code remains under the BSD license but you may add new code under
a different license. Note that all "GPL enhanced" BSD code I am
aware of violates the GPL as GPL section 2 a) requires that every
change has to be logged by author and date _inline_ in the changed
file. Do you know of any such code where is is possible to track down
which part of the code is from the GPLd "enhancements"?
Jörg
--
EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (uni)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
