> Why not state that it is a fork of OpenSolaris on the homepage? Why does it matter? Ubuntu doesn't say it's a fork of Debian. Suse doesn't say it's a fork of

> Why not state that it is a fork of OpenSolaris on the homepage? Why does it matter? Ubuntu doesn't say it's a fork of Debian. Suse doesn't say it's a fork of Slackware. OpenBSD doesn't say it's a fork of NetBSD and FreeBSD and NetBSD doesn't talk about 386BSD either. Also I'm pretty sure Microsoft wouldn't mention OS/2 once in any of their Windows 10 documentation let alone on their landing page. Pretty much all modern operating systems are evolutions, forks, derivatives, etc but usually they diverge enough over time to be their own distinct platform. So while their heritage is an interesting topic it doesn't actually explain anything about the OS and thus has no place on a landing page. > Also the "next gen FS" is just ZFS, first released in 2005 (and they say software moves fast). Because it's still a "next gen FS" and will be until it becomes common current gen with a new generation superseding it (software doesn't actually move that fast when it comes to file systems). Personally I can't see ZFS superseded for a long time to come because the way we store data has changed (eg cloud services might use object storage such as S3 instead of large NFS mounted volumes) and thus the file systems ZFS was looking to displace have once again become "good enough" for most people. I think it would take another seismic shift in how servers and infrastructure are architecture. Likely a shift away from proprietary clouds and towards open cloud computing standards -- if such a movement is even possible in a capitalist-drive world. But I digress.