4 ms·

The kernel developers would probably accept zfs if they could. The main blocker is a license incompatibility issue, which is worked around by distributing zfs i

• ComputerGuru 9y ago
  It's not about whether they could if they would. It's that they didn't, and therefore the things they'd have done if they would have didn't come to pass. I'm saying it didn't matter why. Just that at the end of the day, the kernel team isn't opting their weight behind this, and that should factor in to the decision.
  • justinjlynn 9y ago
    The Linux Kernel project doesn't own the Linux Kernel developers; those that wish to contribute to ZFS on Linux will do so and those that do not wish to will not. Things aren't quite so black and white in the open source world. Just because something isn't in Linus's tree doesn't mean it doesn't get testing and communication doesn't happen. In fact, because it's designed as a module and we have the DKMS infrastructure, being out of mainline really isn't as big an issue as it might have been in the past for distribution. There are disadvantages surely, but keeping up, taking advantage of interested talent and being in the know aren't really huge examples of them -- especially for an established project like ZFS on Linux. EDIT: I would also like to explicitly point out the false equivocation to which I am responding. The idea that the Linux Kernel project ignoring the code because it has an incompatible license is, in any way, equivalent to the Linux Kernel Project maintainers choosing to not "throw their weight" behind a piece of code by mainlining it -- essentially that they are rejecting it due to lack of technical merit -- is specious at best and deliberately instils fear, uncertainty and doubt at worst.