Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 03:51:48 -0800 From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> To: Hans Reiser <reiser@namesys.com> Cc: Chris Mason <mason@suse.com>, Josh MacDonald <jmacd@CS.Berkeley.EDU>, Parity Error <bootup@mail.ru>, freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG, reiserfs-dev@namesys.com Subject: Re: [reiserfs-dev] Re: metadata update durability ordering/soft updates Message-ID: <3C948354.6B998631@mindspring.com> References: <E16lReK-000C3T-00@f10.mail.ru> <3C910C57.71C2D823@mindspring.com> <20020315065651.02637@helen.CS.Berkeley.EDU> <3C923C91.454D7710@mindspring.com> <1562810000.1016224776@tiny> <3C928D21.404EA11D@mindspring.com> <1714680000.1016298986@tiny> <3C93BBF1.7E8801DF@mindspring.com> <3C946B57.3060403@namesys.com> <3C946B33.888F2281@mindspring.com> <3C948B98.2080703@namesys.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hans Reiser wrote: > >that I hold this opinion; I have posted consistently on it > > > you mean, you told everyone but me, the author/inventor of preserve lists. You never came to the FreeBSD-FS list and suggested that FreeBSD use it as the default FS type. If you had, I would have posted both about the license issue with the GPL vs. using it as a root filesystem, and the patent issue, directly to you. Just because someone posts something somewhere you don't read doesn't make it "behind your back". > We would charge for any FreeBSD port, and the license would be a > limiting (proprietary or GPL) license. There are probably appliance > vendors and the like who would find this of interest. Sure. If the IBM GSB Division were still around, I would be lobbying for them to pay you for a port (IBM has a license to use the patents, so it's not an issue). And just so you know what I've said before, so that it's not "behind your back" from not bothering to read those forums: I suspect that the purpose of the use of the GPL is to encourage proprietary licensing (that's fine; many people use that revenue model), and though going to the LGPL would preserve your right to any changes to the code, it would likely reduce the incentive to license the code under other terms. Right now, a proprietary license without an application makes it uninteresting to me, and a GPL license preventing FreeBSD from using it as a boot FS on a CDROM distribution also makes it uninteresting to me. If you ever want to change the license to LGPL, so it's possible to distribute a FreeBSD with ReiserFS as the boot FS so that it's not at a license disadvantage compared to Linux, and either indeminfy people against patent claims in your license, or get a statement from Caldera about the Novell DOW patents, I would be first in line to do the FreeBSD port for you. Unfortunately, as a U.S. citizen, I can't do a port without the indemnification. At some point in the future, if I had an application that needed its features, and rights to a patent license at the same time (or proof it wasn't necessary), I'd certainly consider a commercial license for use with that application. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3C948354.6B998631>