Ingo Molnar wrote:
quoted text
> * Tarkan Erimer <tarkan@netone.net.tr> 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.

quoted text
> 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
-
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/