That said, most people will choose to avoid both those risks, of course. I would be surprised if the CDDL/GPL incompatibility risks were anything but trivial compared to the risks of choosing to use Oracle ZFS patents *without* availing oneself of the licence to those patents offered by the CDDLed ZFS code. I certainly very strongly suspect any the damages would be *much* less than you'd get from losing a patent suit. It'd be interesting to hear expert opinion on what impact that'd have on potential damages. the CDDL being explicit about patent rights and attempting to implement "patent MAD" (Sun having had bad experiences with being sued itself by patent holders), which the GPL (at that time, v2 was the latest) was very weak or quiet on. They differ mostly in technical details, e.g. Philosophically, they are very close in intent. Indeed, Oracle possibly have less ability to sue on those grounds than others, as Ben pointed out.įurther, the incompatibilities between the CDDL and GPL are not terribly great. Re suing for CDDL/GPL incompatibility - any copyright holder could do that. That risk doesn't exist if you use/distribute the Oracle ZFS code under the licence Sun^WOracle widely grants for it. However, that's different from being sued over ZFS patents - the risk the OP was talking about, and the risk I was responding to. I have a reasonably high degree of confidence that there will *never* be a day that it catches up to ZFS. Currently it's nowhere near feature-complete, progress is slow, and people are regularly losing data. We've been hearing that for five years now. It doesn't have all the ZFS features right now, but it'll probably get them in the near future. >Anyway, btrfs is clearly a replacement for ZFS on Linux. One of their goals is a greater separation of platform-specific parts, and an emphasis on improved portability and co-operation between the different ports of ZFS, which should reduce the work required to keep zfsonlinux up to date with upstream. On the contrary, this is likely to be particularly beneficial to Linux, as it represents ZFS as a standalone project, rather than a part of illumos. The main benefactors of this project are *BSDs and various OpenSolaris forks. >This project is probably irrelevant for Linux, since there's no way to get ZFS accepted into the mainline kernel.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |