David Schultz wrote:
CDDL doesn't cause Hybrid GPL like issue copyright and copyleft issue,
As the conclusion, which state are available?
Pre Post
----------------------------------
BSD license ----> CDDL
GPL license ----> CDDL
MIT license ----> CDDL
CDDL ----> BSD license
CDDL ----> GPL license
CDDL ----> MIT license
The Copyright holder can release his code under whatever licenses as he sees fit. If you're not the Copyright holder, then the story is different. It is my understanding that it is possible to add additional restrictions to BSD/MIT-licensed software (without removing the original restrictions and disclaimer, of course). However, the GPL forbids additional restrictions on both source and binary distributions, and the CDDL forbids additional restrictions on source distributions:
You may not offer or impose any terms on any Covered Software in Source Code form that alters or restricts the applicable version of this License or the recipients rights hereunder. --CDDL 1.0, sec 3.4
It's too bad that Sun's lawyers think they need to force people to contribute changes back to them.
I wonder? Anyway I'll try not to mention so much not to make a god furious.
Once again, the post herein and hereto is subject to hereinafter.
Once again: I am not a lawyer and make no guarantee about the accuracy of the contents of this message. The opinions herein do not reflect those of the FreeBSD Project. Use this information at your own peril. Beware of dog. Slippery when wet.
#BTW, my FreeBSD-5.3 work comfortably on this machine so far.
Eitarou _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
