svn commit: r344316 - head/sys/cddl/contrib/opensolaris/uts/common/fs/zfs

[Rodney W. Grimes]

> > On Feb 19, 2019, at 23:56, Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe at freebsd.org> wrote:
> > 
> >> On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 06:43:28PM -0500, Shawn Webb wrote:
> >> At the risk of painting a bikeshed a lovely color of neon purple, I'm
> >> curious about if/how these types of commits get merged upstream to
> >> (OpenZFS|Illumos|ZFS On Linux|where ever ZFS upstream is now|I'm very
> >> confused|is anyone else confused where upstream is?).
> >> 
> >> Who is upstream? Is work like this going to remain as a downstream
> >> patch to ZFS? Or is FreeBSD going to work to upstream this type of
> >> work?
> > 
> > I've always felt that we should've become upstream to everyone else
> > the moment we knew Oracle would eat Sun (20 April 2009), and never
> > understood why it didn't happen and now, ten years later, we're talking
> > about ZFS on fucking Linux becoming our upstream.  Something'd got very
> > wrong here and I'd like to know what and why.
> 
> As others have pointed out, FreeBSD has less developer inertia than Linux,
> and there are (seemingly) less developers or interested parties in running
> an openindiana based stack.
> 
> Also: better OS support for other general purpose infrastructure/usecases
> with items like multitenancy via containerization/CGroups2, Java, etc,
> and mindshare around this and other things.
> 
> The only thing really holding ZoL back in Linux is the fact that (due
> to licensing) it won?t ever be in the Linux kernel.

One can personally link ZoL into your own kernel, and a company/corporate
can even do this and run it on 1000's of servers, you just can not
distribute it to anyone else, which in the end is not really a big
deal, unless your in the Linux distribution business.

-- 
Rod Grimes                                                 rgrimes at freebsd.org