3 ms·

I find it interesting that the SFConservancy argues 'Oracle has a magic wand to make this all go away' by re-licensing ZFS but completely ignores that just as m

I find it interesting that the SFConservancy argues 'Oracle has a magic wand to make this all go away' by re-licensing ZFS but completely ignores that just as much they could re-license the kernel under a CDDL compatible license. Given that Linux (in the broader sense) is asking for something it'd sound more reasonable for them to accomodate the other parties demands. What they do is like saying "Hey I want to buy your house, what you don't want to sell it? How about you make it cheaper then so I can afford it!"

hyperion2010 11y ago
Um... re-licensing the kernel at this point has been deemed completely impossible [0]. 0. https://opensource.stackexchange.com/questions/1774/why-does-linux-still-use-the-gplv2 https://opensource.stackexchange.com/questions/1774/why-does...
- ipalreadytaken 11y ago
  Um... If they really cared about making a quality product they would fix their existing problems, including their (apparently) poor choice of a license. Just because it is hard doesn't mean their shouldn't fix it.
  - hyperion2010 11y ago
    It's not that it is hard, it is that there are literally thousands of contributors that have contributed code under a gplv2 license that would have to be hunted down and consulted about any license change. I'm sure if you're up for it they would be happy to have someone give it a shot so that if a re-license was needed in the future they could do it, but right now there is simply no way to legally re-license the code without spending thousands of hours getting people to sign little pieces of paper that could be used improving the kernel (zfs or no).
    - ipalreadytaken 11y ago
      Right. So hard? Its a lot of work that is unplesant and nobody wants to do, I think that qualifies as "hard". I do agree its impractical, but it seems that for something as important as a function, working file system (and don't suggest that butterface fs is a production ready alternative) that somebody would put in the work to make it happen. After all the file system is everything, if you can't safely store your data, whats the point?
      - ipalreadytaken 11y ago
        As an addition to the above, clearly ZFS is better than the common alternative: raid cards running some unknown firmware (that is most definitely open).

hyperion2010 11y ago

Um... re-licensing the kernel at this point has been deemed completely impossible [0]. 0. https://opensource.stackexchange.com/questions/1774/why-does-linux-still-use-the-gplv2 https://opensource.stackexchange.com/questions/1774/why-does...

ipalreadytaken 11y ago
Um... If they really cared about making a quality product they would fix their existing problems, including their (apparently) poor choice of a license. Just because it is hard doesn't mean their shouldn't fix it.
- hyperion2010 11y ago
  It's not that it is hard, it is that there are literally thousands of contributors that have contributed code under a gplv2 license that would have to be hunted down and consulted about any license change. I'm sure if you're up for it they would be happy to have someone give it a shot so that if a re-license was needed in the future they could do it, but right now there is simply no way to legally re-license the code without spending thousands of hours getting people to sign little pieces of paper that could be used improving the kernel (zfs or no).
  - ipalreadytaken 11y ago
    Right. So hard? Its a lot of work that is unplesant and nobody wants to do, I think that qualifies as "hard". I do agree its impractical, but it seems that for something as important as a function, working file system (and don't suggest that butterface fs is a production ready alternative) that somebody would put in the work to make it happen. After all the file system is everything, if you can't safely store your data, whats the point?
    - ipalreadytaken 11y ago
      As an addition to the above, clearly ZFS is better than the common alternative: raid cards running some unknown firmware (that is most definitely open).