Apple has finally canned [1] the ZFS port [2]. To try and keep momentum up and continue to use the best filing system available, a group of fans have set up a continuation project and mailing list [3,4]. If anyone''s interested in joining in to help, please join in the mailing list. [1] http://alblue.blogspot.com/2009/10/apple-finally-kill-off-zfs.html [2] http://zfs.macosforge.org [3] http://code.google.com/p/maczfs/ [4] http://groups.google.com/group/zfs-macos -- This message posted from opensolaris.org
Alex Blewitt <alex.blewitt at gmail.com> wrote:> Apple has finally canned [1] the ZFS port [2]. To try and keep momentum up and continue to use the best filing system available, a group of fans have set up a continuation project and mailing list [3,4].The article that was mentioned a few hours ago did mention licensing problems without giving any kind of evidence for this claim. If there is evidence, I would be interested in knowing the background, otherwise it looks to me like FUD. J?rg -- EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js at cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) joerg.schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
On Oct 24, 2009, at 08:53, Joerg Schilling wrote:> The article that was mentioned a few hours ago did mention > licensing problems without giving any kind of evidence for > this claim. If there is evidence, I would be interested in > knowing the background, otherwise it looks to me like FUD.I''m guessing that you''ll never see direct evidence given the sensitivity that these negotiations can take. All you''ll guess is rumours and leaks of various levels of reliability. Apple can currently just take the ZFS CDDL code and incorporate it (like they did with DTrace), but it may be that they wanted a "private license" from Sun (with appropriate technical support and indemnification), and the two entities couldn''t come to mutually agreeable terms. Oh well. I''m sure Apple can come up something good in the FS team, but it''s a shame that the wheel has to be re-invented when there''s a production-ready option available.
> Apple can currently just take the ZFS CDDL code and incorporate it > (like they did with DTrace), but it may be that they wanted a "private > license" from Sun (with appropriate technical support and > indemnification), and the two entities couldn''t come to mutually > agreeable terms.I cannot disclose details, but that is the essence of it. Jeff
David Magda wrote:> On Oct 24, 2009, at 08:53, Joerg Schilling wrote: > >> The article that was mentioned a few hours ago did mention >> licensing problems without giving any kind of evidence for >> this claim. If there is evidence, I would be interested in >> knowing the background, otherwise it looks to me like FUD. > > > I''m guessing that you''ll never see direct evidence given the > sensitivity that these negotiations can take. All you''ll guess is > rumours and leaks of various levels of reliability. > > Apple can currently just take the ZFS CDDL code and incorporate it > (like they did with DTrace), but it may be that they wanted a "private > license" from Sun (with appropriate technical support and > indemnification), and the two entities couldn''t come to mutually > agreeable terms.Indemnification, I think reakky could have been a sticking point. I beleive that the NetApp <-> Sun Legal disputes are still working their way through the legal process. If I were Apple I would have wanted some protection in the case Sun loses the case. I don''t think I''d want to be target #2 with precedent already set. That said, from what I''ve read, I don''t beleive NetApp has a leg to stand on.... But then again I''m not a lawyer. ;) -Kyle> > Oh well. I''m sure Apple can come up something good in the FS team, but > it''s a shame that the wheel has to be re-invented when there''s a > production-ready option available. > > _______________________________________________ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss at opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Kyle McDonald <KMcDonald at egenera.com> wrote:> > Apple can currently just take the ZFS CDDL code and incorporate it > > (like they did with DTrace), but it may be that they wanted a "private > > license" from Sun (with appropriate technical support and > > indemnification), and the two entities couldn''t come to mutually > > agreeable terms. > Indemnification, I think reakky could have been a sticking point. I > beleive that the NetApp <-> Sun Legal disputes are still working their > way through the legal process. If I were Apple I would have wanted some > protection in the case Sun loses the case. I don''t think I''d want to be > target #2 with precedent already set.It would be really bad if this would have been finished jst as a result of the way the US law system works :-(> That said, from what I''ve read, I don''t beleive NetApp has a leg to > stand on.... But then again I''m not a lawyer. ;)NetApp did just take ideas that I published before in my diploma thesis, so I cannot see that there are things they could patent. J?rg -- EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js at cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) joerg.schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily