Hi On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 11:42 PM, Gerald B. Cox wrote:
Kevin, I don't believe that is the case in this instance. No one is > talking about mixing code. If you do have something however specifically > regarding the FSF stance on > ZFS, I'd like to read it - I've searched and haven't been able to find > anything. As I previously mentioned, one would think if the FSF had issue > with it they would > come out and rebuke all the statements out there that say it isn't an > issue; especially since Canonical is actively working on it. > 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. Rahul
-- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
