Hi,

I'm the author and maintainer of the Squashfs project. I have been
expecting someone to make a proposal to port Squashfs to another
operating system for a number of years.  I'm pleased that it
has now happened, and in principle I'm interested in cooperating
and supporting any such efforts.

The proposer tried to get into contact with me a couple of weeks ago,
but I left his email unanswered because I found it to be somewhat
arrogant and peremptory in tone.  The short email stated "The main
problem is that your code is licensed under the GPL, and the
OpenSolaris' code is under CDDL".  Additionally, it went on to state
"Of course, we'll have to rewrite a lot of code from scratch in order to
integrate SquashFS into the Solaris VFS layer. But it may be handy to be
authorized to reuse some of you GPL code.".

In essence the proposer simultaneously managed to dismiss and trivialise
over five years of work on Squashfs, while at the same time indirectly
request a change of licence to CDDL without bothering to make a case as
why I might be interested in doing so.

I'm left in a quandary, do I support this proposal and consider
relicensing some of my code to the CDDL?  Obviously, unless I give
my assent, relicensing a port of Squashfs under the CDDL will be
an abuse of my copyright.  Only a complete reimplementation will avoid
this.

It would be useful to know what portions of Squashfs would need to be
relicensed under the CDDL.  I'm assuming CDDL only relates to the kernel
and not user-space utilities (like Mksquashfs and Unsquashfs).

The other thing which worries me about the proposal is that there is no
provision for any formal or informal involvement from myself.  I
would hope to be at least consulted on any technical issues relating
to the filesystem layout itself, to ensure the port can correctly
mount all Squashfs filesystems.

Suggestions and comments welcomed.

Regards

Phillip Lougher
_______________________________________________
storage-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/storage-discuss

Reply via email to