Linked by Rahul on Mon 13th Oct 2008 21:19 UTC
Linux Foundation is organizing a end user collaboration summit this week. A major topic will be a presentation on the new upcoming filesystems - Ext4 and Btrfs. Ted Tso, who is a Linux kernel filesystem developer on a sabbatical from IBM working for Linux Foundation for a year, has talked about the two-pronged approach for the Linux kernel, taking a incremental approach with Ext4 while simultaneously working on the next generation filesystem called btrfs. Read more for details.
Thread beginning with comment 333714
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-07
"If Sun had used GPL, other OSes like MacOS, *BSD and QNX couldn't have ported ZFS or other Solaris tech.Sun chose a more open license to spread the tech around.
So what's the problem with what they did with Java and dual licensing then? Sorry, but that doesn't really wash. "
Why doesn't the Linux community dual license if it needs Solaris tech?
"Too bad Linux users are so selfish.
No, they just want to keep code flowing into their project rather than out of it so they can keep the code open ;-). "
How did you come to that illogical conclusion? Real data shows Solaris IP is flowing very well to other projects. The license is far more open than the GPL.
Member since:2005-07-06
Member since:2005-10-13
Come on, quit trolling. Just come out and say you hate the GPL and think Linux should switch away from it, because that's clearly what you are arguing for.
As for why Linux isn't dual licensed, there are a bunch of reasons. Some developers are opposed to non-GPL licenses. Some of them are dead. Some can't be contacted. All the code they wrote would have to be rewritten just to change the license, and no one thinks that would be worth the effort when they can spend that same effort on improving what they have and writing alternatives. One of the benefits that Sun has with it's code is that is the only copyright owner, which means it is much simpler to change their licensing however they want.
Member since:2005-07-06
Why doesn't the Linux community dual license if it needs Solaris tech?
You haven't answered the question. Why did Sun think that GPL dual licensing Java was the correct option there, maintaining compatibility with lots of existing software with exceptions for where they needed it, and that a completely new license in the CDDL was required elsewhere?
How did you come to that illogical conclusion? Real data shows Solaris IP is flowing very well to other projects.
Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha. I love the usage of 'IP', which is meaningless. Not the point. I'm not talking about code flowing from Sun but others' willingness to commit code to Sun and Solaris. There's no evidence that Sun is even accepting that if it is happening, and things such as the PowerPC port of Solaris tell us that an awful lot is being kept in Sun's four walls.
The license is far more open than the GPL.
Based on what? There is zero code flowing into Solaris from outside Sun. That's when you know you don't have an open source community. If anything, Sun is strangling it.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2005-07-06
So what's the problem with what they did with Java and dual licensing then? Sorry, but that doesn't really wash.
No, they just want to keep code flowing into their project rather than out of it so they can keep the code open ;-).