Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 29th Mar 2013 23:45 UTC
Linux "Today the ZFS on Linux project reached an important milestone with the official 0.6.1 release! Over two years of use by real users has convinced us ZoL is ready for wide scale deployment on everything from desktops to super computers."
Permalink for comment 557228
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
saso
Member since:
2007-04-18

Yes, but Oracle's version of ZFS, the one they got when they bought Sun and are now developing in a proprietary fashion is theirs to re-licence if they so wish.

Again, that's not the version in ZoL. Therefore, Oracle re-licensing their bits isn't enough.

Of course mine are not taken straight out of the air, Danese Cooper who was apparently the one who wrote CDDL while at Sun stated that it was written to be GPL-incompatible.

Nor are mine. Danese Cooper says one thing, some Sun engineers say otherwise. I didn't take a position in this, I even specifically said: " Depends on who you ask. Some people say it was, some people say it wasn't." Stop tearing down straw men.


It's funny you should quote that, because apparently you didn't read the whole section. Read a bit further down on how Simon Phipps disagreed with what Danese said. All this goes to support my statements, that there were mixed feelings on this even within Sun, and to negate your position that it was a clear cut deal.

Draw your own conclusions, but really given the statement from the person presented as having created the licence aswell as how it makes perfect sense for Sun to not want Linux to snap up their coveted tech there is no doubt in my mind that this is so.

No doubt in your mind? I can see that - that's the religious bit I was referring to. You come to a fixed conclusion and find evidence to support it. I, for a change, don't know - it might have been, it might not.

Your statements that Oracle, Red Hat, Intel, IBM, created/worked on BTRFS and SystemTap out of 'religious nuttery' is indeed baseless,

I don't mean to say that everybody who works on these are religious nuts, only some are (such as yourself) - I should have qualified that, mea culpa.

as is your statement that no one will be sued for shipping licence infringing code.

Opinion != statement of fact. Read what I wrote again.

Look dude, you seem hell-bent on making this a discussion about he-said-she-said. I've got better things to do than argue about with people on the net. Talk is cheap, what matters is code.

Reply Parent Score: 1