Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 7th Jun 2010 10:15 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linux Employees of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory have ported Sun's/Oracle's ZFS natively to Linux. Linux already had a ZFS port in userspace via FUSE, since license incompatibilities between the CDDL and GPL prevent ZFS from becoming part of the Linux kernel. This project solves the licensing issue by distributing ZFS as a separate kernel module users will have to download and build for themselves.
Thread beginning with comment 428633
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Comment by kittynipples
by kittynipples on Mon 7th Jun 2010 19:08 UTC
kittynipples
Member since:
2006-08-02

I'm so glad that the GPL nuts insist on everybody else adopting their license, and never the other way around.

Reply Score: -1

RE: Comment by kittynipples
by jrmarino on Mon 7th Jun 2010 20:04 in reply to "Comment by kittynipples"
jrmarino Member since:
2010-06-07

Great observation, Kittynipples. I had exactly the same reaction. Fix your own damn license. Obviously it's not giving problems to truly free licenses, so the problem is with you, GPL.

Reply Parent Score: 1

jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06

If you want to play with Apple, you'll have to do it there way.

If you want to play with Microsoft, you'll have to do it there way.

If you want to play with GPL, you'll have to do it there way.

If you hang out at your friend's house, you'll have to abide by there rules.

There isn't anything stopping Sun from dual-licensing, adjusting the single license or re-licensing. They could always stamp it with the BSD license (as an example from recent news).

In the end though; it's there ball and if they want to take it and go home, the rest of the kids at the soccer field don't really have a say in that.

Reply Parent Score: 3

hamster Member since:
2006-10-06


If you want to play with GPL, you'll have to do it there way.


It seems they arent to interrested in playing with the gpl?


There isn't anything stopping Sun from dual-licensing, adjusting the single license or re-licensing. They could always stamp it with the BSD license (as an example from recent news).

In the end though; it's there ball and if they want to take it and go home, the rest of the kids at the soccer field don't really have a say in that.


Sun arent the one going home. It's the gpl kid. Blaming sun for not being willing to offer everything so it can be put into the linux kernel.

Why should Oracle/sun change the licens just because a the gpl camp wants them to do so?

Because Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory asks them to? Funny thing is if it were the other way around the gpl people would tell them to write their own code...

Reply Parent Score: 2

kittynipples Member since:
2006-08-02

This isn't about Oracle wanting to "play with GPL," this is about some Linux developers wanting Oracle to change its licensing terms to accommodate them. If it was the other way around, you could be sure that Oracle would be told to pound sand.

Reply Parent Score: 1

dvzt Member since:
2008-10-23

If you want to play with Apple, you'll have to do it there way.

If you want to play with Microsoft, you'll have to do it there way.


And if you want to play with Sun, you'll have to do it their way, too.

Reply Parent Score: 2

bert64 Member since:
2007-04-23

Considering Oracle are developing BTRFS, and seemingly did so as a competitor to ZFS which they also now own... It would make a lot of sense for them to re-release ZFS under GPLv2 or BSD and merge the feature sets in the two filesystems.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Tuxie Member since:
2009-04-22

I don't usually play grammar nazi but since you made the same error five times in the same post I just can't stay silent. ;)

Their way, their rules, their ball. ("There isn't" is correct though)

Reply Parent Score: 2