xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Interest from the FreeBSD camp

To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Interest from the FreeBSD camp
From: Russell Cattelan <cattelan@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 11:12:53 -0500
Cc: Juha Saarinen <juha@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
References: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0106111207380.5609-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <3B24E5A1.7404BFBA@xxxxxxxxxxx> <3B24E732.D3A3C8A6@xxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Eric Sandeen wrote:

> Russell Cattelan wrote:
>
> > Two finding anybody in SGI management that actually wants
> > XFS on BSD to happen and thus willing to commit resources to
> > writing a "dual" licensee.
>
> Remember that one of the most time-consuming, difficult parts of this
> project early on was handling the "lawyer issues" - I saw one slide that
> said a couple lawyers quit in the process.... :)  Tackling that all over
> again would probably not be a high priority.

Actually that had to do with the de-encumbering process, i.e. trying
to figure out which pieces of code might be bound up with license
agreements
SGI signed at one point.
Since that  part is already done the issue is mostly the wording of a new
license.

>
>
> Also, you have to think about "what would SGI gain from a BSD port?" -
> what would justify the extra expense for the company?  XFS for Linux is
> a strategic move for SGI, it's not a purely altruistic project.  :)

It wasn't an issue of  gain or not gain for SGI but a sense of what could
be lost:
XFS on solaris seems to be the biggest fear.

SGI is not against XFS on BSD  and they would be willing to find that
happy license medium if somebody from the BSD community would
actually do the most of the work to write a license that would fit with BSD

but  not allow an open free for all in the commercial area.


> -Eric
>
> --
> Eric Sandeen      XFS for Linux    http://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs
> sandeen@xxxxxxx   SGI, Inc.

--
Russell Cattelan
cattelan@xxxxxxxxxxx




<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>