Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2005 14:23:22 +0900 From: Eitarou Kamo <e-kamo@trio.plala.or.jp> To: David Schultz <das@FreeBSD.ORG>, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Star & FreeBSD Message-ID: <420D92CA.5050200@trio.plala.or.jp> In-Reply-To: <20050212005228.GA43996@VARK.MIT.EDU> References: <0A907D6523E90246822D32FA2344E244015E4B@CAA-UNCLMAIL.caa.army.mil> <BE327FD7.184F9%tomonage2@gmx.de> <20050212005228.GA43996@VARK.MIT.EDU>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>Actually, I think the answer is YES. You're apparently answering >a different question. See below. > >It is my understanding that virtually any open-source license is >*compatible* with the MIT and 2-clause BSD licenses, since all the >MIT/2-clause BSD licenses require is that you acknowledge and >preserve the license, copyright, and disclaimer. > >However, I believe it is generally not possible to use CDDL code >for integral parts of FreeBSD because, like the LGPL, the CDDL >requires that modifications be made available under the CDDL. >It is probably fine for kernel modules and extensions, but that's >something core@ needs to decide. > > > As the conclusion, which state are available? Pre Post ---------------------------------- BSD license ----> CDDL GPL license ----> CDDL MIT license ----> CDDL CDDL ----> BSD license CDDL ----> GPL license CDDL ----> MIT license To say nothing of it, the post herein and hereto is subject to hereinafter. >Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer and make no guarantee about the >accuracy of the contents of this message. The opinions herein do >not reflect those of the FreeBSD Project. Use this information at >your own peril. Beware of dog. Slippery when wet. > > What a cool clause above is! It's just simple though. If possible, I'd like to use it in my this sort of post. It is entered into which type of License, I wonder. Eitarou > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?420D92CA.5050200>