On 17-Apr-07, at 10:54 PM, Wee Yeh Tan wrote:
On 4/17/07, David R. Litwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 17/04/07, Wee Yeh Tan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 4/17/07, David R. Litwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > So, it comes to this: Why, precisely, can ZFS not be
> > released under a License which _is_ GPL
> > compatible?
>
> So why do you think should it be released under a GPL compatible
license?
So that it can be used directly with the Linux kernel.
That matters to the developers of ZFS/OpenSolaris how?
Also, note that we are not sure if GPL really matters in the case of
porting a filesystem to Linux. As others have brought up, there are
many commercial file systems/volume managers available in Linux as
well.
On the flip side, why shouldn't it be?
Therein lies the difference in perspective. Linux folks thinks it's
OpenSolaris's fault that ZFS cannot be integrated into Linux.
OpenSolaris folks do not think so.
The OpenSolaris folks here seem to think it's Linux' fault. Impasse.
But I'm sworn not to discuss this here :)
--T
If I'm your neighbour and I'm
looking at expanding my house in your direction, should you move out
of the way?
--
Just me,
Wire ...
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
