Originally posted by chrisb
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Canonical Talks Up Ubuntu 16.04 LTS With ZFS, LXD
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by Stellarwind View PostGPL insists that every "derived work" that comes together with GPL, must be under GPL as well. Canonical does not claim ZFS is under GPL, so it doesn't violate CDDL requirement and Oracle has no grounds to sue. Canonical also claims that ZFS is not a derived work of the kernel, therefore they can keep CDDL license, but some people disagree.
- Likes 1
Leave a comment:
-
If Oracle makes a move they will wait until it is wide spread. Even if it is clearly not a violation, I wouldn't put it past the company that claimed copyright on a range check function to sue.
Leave a comment:
-
There is no CDDL violation in including zfs in Ununtu side by side with Linux kernel as a module. Problem is in possible GPL violation. CDDL basically saying use it where you want, but it must remain under CDDL. GPL insists that every "derived work" that comes together with GPL, must be under GPL as well. Canonical does not claim ZFS is under GPL, so it doesn't violate CDDL requirement and Oracle has no grounds to sue. Canonical also claims that ZFS is not a derived work of the kernel, therefore they can keep CDDL license, but some people disagree.
p.s. "Rampant layering violations" is actually a good case for ZFS being alien to Linux and therefore not a derived work.Last edited by Stellarwind; 20 April 2016, 08:33 PM.
- Likes 3
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by DanL View PostI was told that there's absolutely no issue with CDDL violation (i.e. Oracle has no legal case). OpenZFS was legally forked before Oracle closed off their Solaris/ZFS code. The only issue is whether distributing ZFS the way Ubuntu has violates the GPL.
- Likes 1
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by tegs View PostI just don't see the point in shipping ZFS with the ISOs for the desktop and the different flavors. I could only see this being valuable in shipping with their Ubuntu Server ISOs as that is where this is going to be used anyways. Why don't they just keep ZFS as a separate package or not ship it with the ISO and then bring it in via an apt upgrade of a meta package.
Ever heard of this things called containers? http://blog.dustinkirkland.com/2016/...untu-1604.html
Leave a comment:
-
I just don't see the point in shipping ZFS with the ISOs for the desktop and the different flavors. I could only see this being valuable in shipping with their Ubuntu Server ISOs as that is where this is going to be used anyways. Why don't they just keep ZFS as a separate package or not ship it with the ISO and then bring it in via an apt upgrade of a meta package.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Mystro256 View PostAnd we all know how much Oracle likes to suing people for products they didn't even create *cough*java*cough*.
No, I'm not a big fan of copyrightable APIs, but strictly from an ownership perspective they are entitled to sue.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by chrisb View Post
This. Canonical is taking a bit of a risk - in the best case they get to ship ZFS, but in the worst case it will be a PR disaster if they lose against Oracle and have to withdraw ZFS after tens of thousands of customers have already started using it. Once it's out there being used in the wild there will be no viable automated upgrade route back to ext4 (or whatever), and customer systems will be unbootable if Canonical is forced to push kernel upgrades that don't support ZFS.
Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: