Joerg Schilling wrote:
Stephen Harpster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The big bonus is that GPLv3 will open us up to a whole new audience.
Linux aside, there are plenty of other big projects that will combine
with OpenSolaris more easily if we're dual licensed. To be successful,
you want to reach out to as many communities as possible. The more
friends the better. GPLv3 will give us that.
I cannot see this.....Linux stays with GPLv2 and the main problem is not
Linux but the fact that people working on Linux do not like to use sources
from OpenSolaris. I see no reason why Linux could not take ZFS and use
it directly inside Linux.
GPLv2 and GPLv3 won't mix. As long as Linus insists on keeping the
kernel with v2, ZFS won't migrate to Linux (because it has kernel
components). Now if the Linux kernel moved to v3, that's a different
story..... (but one that won't happen for years).
An assembly exception is sort of a way to neuter a license. Suppose I
have two files, gpl.c and harpster.c. gpl.c is dual licensed under CDDL
and GPLv3. harpster.c is licensed under the Harpster license, a
proprietary license that solves world hunger. ;-)
Now normally, linking gpl.c and harpster.c would force harpster.c to
also be licensed as GPL. That's the "viral" nature of GPL everyone
This is not true.
The GPL does not use the term "linking", so using "linking" in an explanation
definitely does not help to understand what can be done and what cannot be done.
I knew that using the work "linking" would bring this quagmire back.
Sorry, folks.
1) The GPL allows to use GPLd drivers inside Solaris.
Using a driver inside a OS kernel does not create a new derived work.
The GPLd driver is merely used, but as long as the driver is not
required to use the OS, it cannot be part of the "work" OpenSolaris
kernel.
If the driver is shipped in binary form together with the the binary
of the Solaris kernel (inside one single binary), then GPL §3 requires
the publisher to publish all sourcecode that is needed to compile and
link that binary. If the driver is published as a separete binray, then
this is no problem as the FSF did admit that the GPL is conforming
to the OSI OSS rules and in special follows OSI §9.
2) The GPL allows to use ZFS inside Linux.
ZFS is a big work and the changes that are needed in order to run ZFS
on Linux do not make ZFS a "work derived from Linux".
The few parts from the Linux code that will be needed for the port
will be covered by the "Wissenschaftliches Kleinzitat" klause in the
Copyright law.
I don't believe that the majority of the legal community would agree
with you. Or the Linux community for that matter. If what you said is
true, then ZFS would already be in Linux.
Jörg
--
Stephen Harpster
Director, Open Source Software
Sun Microsystems, Inc.
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
