From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Apr 12 11:21:43 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A94F2106566C for ; Mon, 12 Apr 2010 11:21:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from yanefbsd@gmail.com) Received: from mail-qy0-f181.google.com (mail-qy0-f181.google.com [209.85.221.181]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 531858FC1D for ; Mon, 12 Apr 2010 11:21:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: by qyk11 with SMTP id 11so4718399qyk.13 for ; Mon, 12 Apr 2010 04:21:42 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:received:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=OrFqDrb8nWzLF60NEfKXQ0DQhNXJ0i61NcrQCi1Ry3c=; b=rWMLy6MqupcUyMjP+nY4mbNH9Nmr/U4G5VCwt6Q3rGznbo3rLO1yy4PFV7Y6wnKtkV b+EljLzXUjzYb7QXiGds9wuvaJEPeGqRhxZbNKGEPnYbJ/OO52gqt9A8Ixx69/+ZUlNm 5KfHo9BiTwAEmyKdfoR5clCzcL9bZ3sASmq/w= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=HsKz3iHCCQAoindih4V9RGQO8yLWfK0kBnTZ5bA1UFJ0+AdeM/8/GdSVIAVC/TSTi6 x1rpRLhl62nu2CLJgUheal4FSXvgRoV+UHcicskrKnztVj8DpYKpCiyh6HahrPqQZX4M R2wYI1NWcSu3Of4jer2+onEmCnP+JaQdJqYsI= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.229.28.85 with HTTP; Mon, 12 Apr 2010 04:21:41 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20100407173334.GC76941@dan.emsphone.com> <8114C0B7-2288-457C-88D6-E5E3B0CC4E51@mac.com> <20100409174445.GA4359@dan.emsphone.com> Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 04:21:41 -0700 Received: by 10.229.98.129 with SMTP id q1mr3474041qcn.100.1271071301260; Mon, 12 Apr 2010 04:21:41 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: From: Garrett Cooper To: Tom Evans Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: Dan Nelson , current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: When will we can use ZFS v24? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 11:21:43 -0000 On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 3:48 AM, Tom Evans wrote= : > On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 6:44 PM, Dan Nelson wrot= e: >> In the last episode (Apr 08), Garrett Cooper said: >>> On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 2:30 PM, Chuck Swiger wrote: >>> > On Apr 8, 2010, at 2:18 PM, krad wrote: >>> > [ ... ] >>> >>> is that even possible with CDDL? >>> >> >>> >> im not a lawyer but it wouldn't surprise me >>> > >>> > I'm not a lawyer either, but I was active in reviewing and suggesting >>> > changes to CDDL submission for OSI approval back in 2004. >>> > >>> > A copyright owner always has the ability to relicense their code unde= r >>> > other terms, but existing code is guaranteed to be available, >>> > redistributable to others, etc under the terms of the current version= of >>> > CDDL; in particular see: >>> > >>> > If Oracle chooses, they might make future changes to the ZFS source c= ode >>> > under different or more restrictive licensing terms, but what's >>> > available now is always going to be available. >>> >>> The same of basic principle applies to BDB; originally it was BSD licen= sed >>> in 1.x under FreeBSD, then GPLed in 2.x+ (IIRC), then left to pasture i= n >>> 4.x after Oracle acquired Sleepycat DB. =A0MySQL is GPLv2 today... =A0w= ho >>> knows what it might be tomorrow... >> >> BDB was never GPL'ed; it was and still is BSD-licensed. >> >> http://www.oracle.com/technology/software/products/berkeley-db/htdocs/os= license.html >> > > IANAL, but that is not a BSD license. It is the Sleepycat license, > which is compatible with GPL. > > The giveaway is in section 3: > > =A0* 3. Redistributions in any form must be accompanied by information on > =A0* =A0 =A0how to obtain complete source code for the DB software and an= y > =A0* =A0 =A0accompanying software that uses the DB software. > > The '.. any accompanying software' clause makes it quite like the GPL. Dan and Tom, You both are correct, according to ye great wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sleepycat_License . Thanks for the correction, -Garrett