Initial Linux ZFS GIT Repo

2026-05-22 18:40:43 +03:00 · 2008-11-20 12:01:55 -08:00
commit 34dc7c2f25
444 changed files with 187636 additions and 0 deletions
@@ -0,0 +1,113 @@
+From: Chris Dunlap <cdunlap@llnl.gov>
+To: tak1@llnl.gov (James Tak)
+Cc: rogers11@llnl.gov (Leah Rogers), garlick@llnl.gov (Jim Garlick),
+        mgary@llnl.gov (Mark Gary), kimcupps@llnl.gov (Kim Cupps)
+Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2007 15:37:07 -0700
+Subject: CDDL/GPL licensing issues for ZFS Linux port
+
+James,
+
+We want to port Sun's Zettabyte File System (ZFS) to Linux and
+ultimately redistribute the source code of our work.  We've been
+talking with Leah about this and have a meeting scheduled with you
+for this coming Thursday at 2pm.  I just wanted to give you a summary
+before the meeting of what we're proposing.
+
+ZFS is part of OpenSolaris which is licensed under the Common
+Development and Distribution License (CDDL):
+
+  http://www.opensolaris.org/os/licensing/cddllicense.txt
+
+The Linux kernel is licensed under the GNU General Public License (GPL)
+(specifically, under version 2 of the license only):
+
+  http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl.html
+
+While these are both Open-Source licenses, the Free Software Foundation
+(FSF) states they are incompatible with one another:
+
+  http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/index_html
+
+  "[CDDL] is a free software license which is not a strong copyleft;
+  it has some complex restrictions that make it incompatible with the
+  GNU GPL.  It requires that all attribution notices be maintained,
+  while the GPL only requires certain types of notices.  Also, it
+  terminates in retaliation for certain aggressive uses of patents.
+  So, a module covered by the GPL and a module covered by the CDDL
+  cannot legally be linked together."
+
+As an aside, Sun is reportedly considering releasing OpenSolaris under
+GPL3 (i.e., the upcoming version 3 of the GNU General Public License):
+
+  http://blogs.sun.com/jonathan/entry/hp_and_sun_partnering_around
+
+  http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060130-6074.html
+
+  http://news.com.com/Sun+considers+GPL+3+license+for+Solaris/2100-1016_3-6032893.html
+
+Since the GPL3 has not been finalized, it is unclear whether
+incompatibilities will exist between GPL2 and GPL3.
+
+Linus Torvalds (the original creator of Linux) describes his views
+on the licensing of Linux kernel modules in the following email thread:
+
+  http://linuxmafia.com/faq/Kernel/proprietary-kernel-modules.html
+
+Most of this thread is in regards to proprietary closed-source
+binary-only modules for Linux.  Linus generally considers modules
+written for Linux using the kernel infrastructures to be derived
+works of Linux, even if they don't copy any existing Linux code.
+However, he specifically singles out drivers and filesystems ported
+from other operating systems as not being derived works:
+
+  "It would be rather preposterous to call the Andrew FileSystem a
+  'derived work' of Linux, for example, so I think it's perfectly
+  OK to have a AFS module, for example."
+
+  "The original binary-only modules were for things that were
+  pre-existing works of code, i.e., drivers and filesystems ported
+  from other operating systems, which thus could clearly be argued
+  to not be derived works..."
+
+Based on this, it seems our port of Sun's ZFS filesystem to Linux
+would not be considered a derived work of Linux, and therefore not
+covered by the GPL.  The issue of the CDDL/GPL license incompatibility
+becomes moot.  As such, we should be able to redistribute our changes
+to ZFS in source-code form licensed under the CDDL since this will
+be a derived work of the original ZFS code.  There seems to be some
+dissent as to whether a binary module could be redistributed as well,
+but that issue does not concern us.  In this instance, we are only
+interested in redistribution of our work in source-code form.
+
+-Chris
+
+To: Chris Dunlap <cdunlap@llnl.gov>
+From: James Tak <tak1@llnl.gov>
+Subject: Re: CDDL/GPL licensing issues for ZFS Linux port
+Cc: rogers11@llnl.gov (Leah Rogers), garlick@llnl.gov (Jim Garlick),
+        mgary@llnl.gov (Mark Gary), kimcupps@llnl.gov (Kim Cupps)
+Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 14:53:01 -0700
+
+Hi Chris,
+As per our discussion today, the ZFS port you are proposing releasing under
+the CDDL license should be o.k. since it is a derivative work of the
+original ZFS module (under CDDL) and is therefore also subject to CDDL
+under the distribution terms of that license.  While the issue of linking
+has been greatly debated in the OS community, I think it is fair to say in
+this instance the ZFS port is not a derivative work of Linux and thus not
+subject to the GPL.  Furthermore, it shouldn't be a problem especially
+since even Linus Torvald has expressed that modules such as yours are not
+derived works of Linux.
+
+Let me know if you have any further questions at x27274.  Thanks.
+
+Regards,
+James
+
+James S. Tak
+Assistant Laboratory Counsel for Intellectual Property
+Office of Laboratory Counsel
+Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
+phone: (925) 422-7274
+fax: (925) 423-2231
+tak1@llnl.gov