Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Tarkan Erimer <[email protected]> wrote:
[...] Just, I asked simple question and included a simple example in
it. [...]
actually, what you said was this:
" I hope we should upgrade to GPLv3 and Sun should "Dual License"
the OpenSolaris via GPLv3 (or at least,GPLv3 should be CDDL
compatible.). "
Why don't you include the last sentence I wrote: "So,we should have more
fruits (like ZFS,DTrace etc.) ;-) "
So, that's why I said it. Because, as all the time, we did it: Importing
and exporting codes to/from different open source projects.
and to that the answer was:
" The OpenSolaris community has already stated that they do not want to
accept GPLv3 [...] "
in other words: your hypothetical is false today. You called us to do a
specific action, but why did you then include a factually false
'example' to underline that point of yours? Or if you simply did not
know about the OpenSolaris community's position beforehand, why dont you
just admit that and withdraw from that line of argument gracefully?
Ingo
As I mentioned in my previous posts: This is **not** in the hands of the
"OpenSolaris Community" to make and apply such decision. Sun itself
**will decide** it. Also, there are strong indications that Sun is very
interested to make "OpenSolaris" at least "Dual-Licensed" with GPLv3.
Regards,
Tarkan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
