NakkiNyan wrote:grahamperrin wrote:The tweet about letting Apple have code does not suggest free; it was in response to someone who is willing to pay.
Actually it does imply free, if it was up for sale to Apple he would have said "we will happily sell the ZEVO source to Apple".
If you ask someone for something :
"Hey, can I have this?" > implies free
"Hey, can you sell me this" > implies cash transaction
His tweet implies
1) He would be willing to license, sell, or give away the source code to Apple. It does not imply whether he would be willing to transfer ownership of the software, whether he would or would not charge for a transfer of ownership, or whether he would or would not charge for a license
2) He does not believe Apple has any interest in the code
3) He does not believe GreenBytes will be able to make any significant money off of ZEVO
4) He does not see a hypothetical decision by Apple to bring ZFS to OS X natively as any sort of competitive threat
5) There has been no discussion with Apple at all, otherwise he would not be discussing this publicly
6) He likes ZFS
7) He does not believe GreenBytes has any special technical capability to further ZEVO and he believes Apple would be better suited to the work
The fact that he was responding to a tweet that mentioned paying money for Apple supported ZFS has zero relevance to interpreting whether he would intend to sell the code to Apple or give it to them for free.