Re: [zfs-discuss] Oracle to no longer support ZFS on OpenSolaris?

[Frank Cusack]

On 4/21/10 3:48 PM +0100 Bayard Bell wrote:

Oracle has a number of technologies that they've acquired that have
remained dual-licensed, and that includes acquiring InnoTech, which they
carried forward despite being able to use it as nearly an existential
threat to MySQL. In the case of their acquisition of Sleepycat, I'm aware
of open-source licensing terms becoming more generous after the Oracle
acquisition, where Oracle added a clear stipulation that redistribution
requiring commercial licensing had to involve third parties, where prior
to the acquisition Sleepycat had taken a less more expansive
interpretation that covered just about any form of software distribution.


I'm no supporter of Oracle's business practices, but I am 90% sure that
Sleepycat changed their license before the Oracle acquisition.  Yes,
it was particularly onerous before they went to standard GPL.

-frank
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Oracle to no longer support ZFS on OpenSolaris?

[Andriy Gapon]

on 23/04/2010 04:22 BM said the following:
> On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 2:18 PM, Ken Gunderson  wrote:
>> Greetings All:
>>
>> Granted there has been much fear, uncertainty, and doubt following
>> Oracle's take over of Sun, but I ran across this on a FreeBSD mailing
>> list post dated 4/20/2010"
>>
>> "...Seems that Oracle won't offer support for ZFS on opensolaris"
>>
>> Link here to full post here:
>>
>> 
> 
> I am not surprised it comes from FreeBSD mail list. :)

Why this attitude about FreeBSD? Did we eat your lunch?

Have you actually bothered to follow the link?
First, it was a pure speculation inside a question.
Second, look what kind of mailing list was that (general FreeBSD-related 
questions
from anyone).
Third, look from whom that came - just a random person asking a question.
[Paranoia mode: maybe it was even you.]

If, for example, I posted some nonsense about e.g. Apple on e.g. OpenSolaris
mailing list; what conclusions would you make then?

> I am amazed of
> their BSD conferences when they presenting all this *BSD stuff using
> Apple Macs (they claim it is a FreeBSD, just very bad version of it),
> Ubuntu Linux (not yet BSD) or GNU/Microsoft Windows (oh, everybody
> does that sin, right?) with a PowerPoint running on it (sure, who
> wants ugly OpenOffice if there no brain enough to use LaTeX).

What you wrote tells more about you than about FreeBSD and FreeBSD community.

P.S.
I am surprised that on this useful mostly technical mailing list such random
garbage from a random source gets posted at all.  And then gets taken seriously
even...

-- 
Andriy Gapon
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Oracle to no longer support ZFS on OpenSolaris?

[Michael Sullivan]

Bogdan,

Thanks for pointing this out and passing along the latest news from Oracle.

Stamp out FUD wherever possible.  At this point, unless it is said officially, 
and Oracle generally keeps pretty tight lipped about products and directions, 
people should regard most things as heresy.

Cheers,

Mike

---
Michael Sullivan   
michael.p.sulli...@me.com
http://www.kamiogi.net/
Japan Mobile: +81-80-3202-2599
US Phone: +1-561-283-2034

On 23 Apr 2010, at 10:22 , BM wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 2:18 PM, Ken Gunderson  wrote:
>> Greetings All:
>> 
>> Granted there has been much fear, uncertainty, and doubt following
>> Oracle's take over of Sun, but I ran across this on a FreeBSD mailing
>> list post dated 4/20/2010"
>> 
>> "...Seems that Oracle won't offer support for ZFS on opensolaris"
>> 
>> Link here to full post here:
>> 
>> 
> 
> I am not surprised it comes from FreeBSD mail list. :) I am amazed of
> their BSD conferences when they presenting all this *BSD stuff using
> Apple Macs (they claim it is a FreeBSD, just very bad version of it),
> Ubuntu Linux (not yet BSD) or GNU/Microsoft Windows (oh, everybody
> does that sin, right?) with a PowerPoint running on it (sure, who
> wants ugly OpenOffice if there no brain enough to use LaTeX).
> 
> As for a starter, please somebody read this:
> http://developers.sun.ru/techdays2010/reports/OracleSolarisTrack/TD_STP_OracleSolarisFuture_Roberts.pdf
> ...and thus better I suggest to refrain people broadcasting a complete
> garbage from a trash dump places to spread this kind of FUD to the
> public and thus just shaking an air with no meaning behind.
> 
> Take care.
> 
> -- 
> Kind regards, BM
> 
> Things, that are stupid at the beginning, rarely ends up wisely.
> ___
> zfs-discuss mailing list
> zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Oracle to no longer support ZFS on OpenSolaris?

[BM]

On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 2:18 PM, Ken Gunderson  wrote:
> Greetings All:
>
> Granted there has been much fear, uncertainty, and doubt following
> Oracle's take over of Sun, but I ran across this on a FreeBSD mailing
> list post dated 4/20/2010"
>
> "...Seems that Oracle won't offer support for ZFS on opensolaris"
>
> Link here to full post here:
>
> 

I am not surprised it comes from FreeBSD mail list. :) I am amazed of
their BSD conferences when they presenting all this *BSD stuff using
Apple Macs (they claim it is a FreeBSD, just very bad version of it),
Ubuntu Linux (not yet BSD) or GNU/Microsoft Windows (oh, everybody
does that sin, right?) with a PowerPoint running on it (sure, who
wants ugly OpenOffice if there no brain enough to use LaTeX).

As for a starter, please somebody read this:
http://developers.sun.ru/techdays2010/reports/OracleSolarisTrack/TD_STP_OracleSolarisFuture_Roberts.pdf
...and thus better I suggest to refrain people broadcasting a complete
garbage from a trash dump places to spread this kind of FUD to the
public and thus just shaking an air with no meaning behind.

Take care.

-- 
Kind regards, BM

Things, that are stupid at the beginning, rarely ends up wisely.
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Oracle to no longer support ZFS on OpenSolaris?

[Bayard Bell]

Eugen,

Oracle has a number of technologies that they've acquired that have  
remained dual-licensed, and that includes acquiring InnoTech, which  
they carried forward despite being able to use it as nearly an  
existential threat to MySQL. In the case of their acquisition of  
Sleepycat, I'm aware of open-source licensing terms becoming more  
generous after the Oracle acquisition, where Oracle added a clear  
stipulation that redistribution requiring commercial licensing had to  
involve third parties, where prior to the acquisition Sleepycat had  
taken a less more expansive interpretation that covered just about any  
form of software distribution. Their record is a lot more nuanced that  
you're prepared to acknowledge or allow. Lo and behold, open source  
technologies acquired by Oracle remain open and are used by other open  
source projects. That's not easily squared with your insistence that  
the technology is "finished" by virtue of a change in corporate  
ownership and requires a fork to right things. How about we talk about  
the problems we are in fact having rather than letting our actions be  
guided by the most suggestive rumour that floats by?


Sorry if I've not made sufficient allowances for simplistic conspiracy  
theories, but unless you can show some evidence of serious research  
supporting your views, the line you're talking falls before Daniel  
Patrick Moynihan's remark that, "Everyone is entitled to his own  
opinion, but not his own facts."


Cheers,
Bayard

Am 21 Apr 2010 um 10:40 schrieb Eugen Leitl:


On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 06:51:01PM +0100, Bayard Bell wrote:


These folks running the relevant business lines have already said
publicly to the OGB that Oracle's corporate management accepts the
basic premise of OpenSolaris, so why pass the time waiting to learn
how they're going to make good on this by concocting baroque
conspiracy theories about how they're going to reverse themselves in
some material fashion or passing along rumours to that effect?


It doesn't take 'baroque conspiracy theories', just look at
Oracle's track of past technology acquisitions. The burden
of proof is quite onerous, and quite in their court. Words
are not nearly enough.

It seems the technology is finished, unless a credible fork is
forthcoming.

--
Eugen* Leitl http://leitl.org";>leitl http://leitl.org
__
ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss


___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Oracle to no longer support ZFS on OpenSolaris?

[Dominic Kay]

To reiterate, Oracle has no plan to move from ZFS as the principle 
storage platform for Solaris 10 and OpenSolaris. It remains key to both 
data management and to the OS infrastructure such as root/boot, install 
and upgrade. 
Thanks


Dominic Kay
Product Manager, Filesystems
Oracle
+44 780 124 6099
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Oracle to no longer support ZFS on OpenSolaris?

[Orvar Korvar]

Great! Dominik, Oracle needs to silence FUD immediately. Proactive initiative. 
:o)
-- 
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Oracle to no longer support ZFS on OpenSolaris?

[Alan Hargreaves]

Title: signature




But it is surely taking in a whole boatload of anecdotal information
and precious little in the way of real data or online references.

alan.

Eugen Leitl wrote:

  On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 06:51:01PM +0100, Bayard Bell wrote:

  
  
These folks running the relevant business lines have already said  
publicly to the OGB that Oracle's corporate management accepts the  
basic premise of OpenSolaris, so why pass the time waiting to learn  
how they're going to make good on this by concocting baroque  
conspiracy theories about how they're going to reverse themselves in  
some material fashion or passing along rumours to that effect?

  
  
It doesn't take 'baroque conspiracy theories', just look at
Oracle's track of past technology acquisitions. The burden
of proof is quite onerous, and quite in their court. Words
are not nearly enough.

It seems the technology is finished, unless a credible fork is 
forthcoming. 

  


-- 




  

   

Alan Hargreaves | Principal Technical Support Engineer 
Solaris and Networking | Global Systems Support 
Email: alan.hargrea...@oracle.com
  
Blog: alanhargreaves.wordpress.com
  
Phone: +61-2-9844-5379 | Mobile: +61-416-207-573 
  Oracle Global Customer Services 
  
  

  
  
 
  Oracle is committed to developing practices and products
that help protect the environment  
  

  
   
  

  





___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Oracle to no longer support ZFS on OpenSolaris?

[Eugen Leitl]

On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 06:51:01PM +0100, Bayard Bell wrote:

> These folks running the relevant business lines have already said  
> publicly to the OGB that Oracle's corporate management accepts the  
> basic premise of OpenSolaris, so why pass the time waiting to learn  
> how they're going to make good on this by concocting baroque  
> conspiracy theories about how they're going to reverse themselves in  
> some material fashion or passing along rumours to that effect?

It doesn't take 'baroque conspiracy theories', just look at
Oracle's track of past technology acquisitions. The burden
of proof is quite onerous, and quite in their court. Words
are not nearly enough.

It seems the technology is finished, unless a credible fork is 
forthcoming. 

-- 
Eugen* Leitl http://leitl.org";>leitl http://leitl.org
__
ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Oracle to no longer support ZFS on OpenSolaris?

[Bayard Bell]

Ken,

The sharpest parts of my remarks weren't directed your way, and I  
regret if that wasn't as clear as I had thought. For clarification: I  
was referring to the thread as starting with what you forwarded by URL  
(which was sent from a gmail address to the freebsd list), and my  
objection was in the first instance to people who came back and  
questioned the reply because it came from a gmail address.


As fortuitous as it is that someone from Oracle stepped into say that  
there are no plans to strip ZFS out of OpenSolaris, my fundamental  
objection nonetheless stands: the premise that it would be pulled had  
a basic lack of credibility in both its premise and its particulars. I  
appreciate that you mean to help by quashing these kind of stories,  
but do we really mean to re-task the OpenSolaris list with challenging  
every suggestive rumour that shows up on the Internet about the impact  
of the acquisition on product roadmaps? I mean, is asking to have it  
rejected by authoritative sources really a compelling reason to  
circulate it further in the first instance? That seems to involve some  
risks (e.g. perhaps you don't get a response, as there seem to be a  
number of people trying to get the hang of Oracle corporate  
communications policies, which seem deeply vexing to parts of the  
community that are concerned about the future of their sweat equity in  
OpenSolaris), where there are reasonable criteria for saying when this  
is unnecessary. Surely there has to be some threshold of plausibility  
before these things are passed on in a public forum, and, while I  
don't mean to imply that forwarding the post to this list is something  
singularly egregious, the two further posts quoted in my reply  
reinforced to me how low the bar was set and how much this  
participates in conspiracy theory (a rumour is posted to one list,  
forwarded to another, attracts a rebuttal, and rather than asking why  
they should credit the rumour in the first place, there remain a few  
people whose spirit of critical inquiry is singularly focused on the  
provenance of the rebuttal). Given that there are clearly some people  
for whom this wasn't nipped in the bud in the manner you suggest,  
where these people wouldn't necessarily have been aware of this were  
it not for your post, despite your best intentions, there remain signs  
of lingering negative effects that you've not addressed below. I don't  
mean to be vehement towards you in saying any of this, but I don't on  
the other hand mean to understate real, foreseeable, and negative  
consequences.


For such reasons, shouldn't the standard for forwarding with a request  
for clarification require that a rumour consist of what a reasonable  
person would believe based on clear attribution and credible sources?


Cheers,
Bayard

Am 20 Apr 2010 um 20:09 schrieb Ken Gunderson:



On Tue, 2010-04-20 at 18:51 +0100, Bayard Bell wrote:

This thread starts with someone who doesn't claim to have any
authoritative information or attempt to cite any sources using a  
gmail

account to post to a mailgroup. Now people turn around and say that


Whoa!  By way of clarification:

1) If I had authoritative information why would I bother posing the
question?

2) The source were I ran across the info that prompted my query was
cited in my initial post and present in the email sent out by the
Mailman listserver.  Noting evidence of confusion from some reading  
via

Jive forum interface I followed up with an explanation.

3) Rather than fan rumor and speculation by posting to
freebsd-questions, a list to which I am not subscribed, I addressed my
query to what I deemed the most appropriate source for an  
authoritative

answer.  Moreover, in so doing I explicitly qualified the post as
suspect.

4) I do not have, nor have ever had, a gmail address.  To the contrary
my email address is readily apparent in my signature.


they doubt the sourcing on this, but looking at the archives of this
list, there are a number of posts over the years from a Dominic Kay
using this gmail address but providing links to a Sun employee blog
(http://blogs.sun.com/dom/). If you Google "Dominic Kay Oracle", you


I didn't need to, as I already knew the name.  Hence I publicly
acknowledged his reply as more than satisfactory, expressed my
gratitude, and moved on.  I don't really see grounds for directing  
these
vehement comments my way.  The misinformation has now been  
identified as

such and nipped in the bud, wh/I would think would be a good thing.

Thank you and have a nice day.


--
Ken Gunderson 



___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Oracle to no longer support ZFS on OpenSolaris?

[Ken Gunderson]

On Tue, 2010-04-20 at 18:51 +0100, Bayard Bell wrote:
> This thread starts with someone who doesn't claim to have any
> authoritative information or attempt to cite any sources using a gmail
> account to post to a mailgroup. Now people turn around and say that

Whoa!  By way of clarification: 

1) If I had authoritative information why would I bother posing the
question?

2) The source were I ran across the info that prompted my query was
cited in my initial post and present in the email sent out by the
Mailman listserver.  Noting evidence of confusion from some reading via
Jive forum interface I followed up with an explanation.

3) Rather than fan rumor and speculation by posting to
freebsd-questions, a list to which I am not subscribed, I addressed my
query to what I deemed the most appropriate source for an authoritative
answer.  Moreover, in so doing I explicitly qualified the post as
suspect.

4) I do not have, nor have ever had, a gmail address.  To the contrary
my email address is readily apparent in my signature.

>  they doubt the sourcing on this, but looking at the archives of this
> list, there are a number of posts over the years from a Dominic Kay
> using this gmail address but providing links to a Sun employee blog
> (http://blogs.sun.com/dom/). If you Google "Dominic Kay Oracle", you

I didn't need to, as I already knew the name.  Hence I publicly
acknowledged his reply as more than satisfactory, expressed my
gratitude, and moved on.  I don't really see grounds for directing these
vehement comments my way.  The misinformation has now been identified as
such and nipped in the bud, wh/I would think would be a good thing.

Thank you and have a nice day.


-- 
Ken Gunderson 

___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Oracle to no longer support ZFS on OpenSolaris?

[Bayard Bell]

This thread starts with someone who doesn't claim to have any  
authoritative information or attempt to cite any sources using a gmail  
account to post to a mailgroup. Now people turn around and say that  
they doubt the sourcing on this, but looking at the archives of this  
list, there are a number of posts over the years from a Dominic Kay  
using this gmail address but providing links to a Sun employee blog (http://blogs.sun.com/dom/ 
). If you Google "Dominic Kay Oracle", you can find this (http://66.102.9.132/search?q=cache:NuhbvEoafV4J:www.snwusa.com/ereg/popups/speakerdetails.php%3Feventid%3D8242%26speakerid%3D5987+dominic+kay+oracle&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk 
) cached hit as some corroboration of his role. If this is a false  
flag, it was planted three years ago and has somehow managed to pass  
without challenge in the interim. People are more than happy to say  
that they're sceptical, but there's a lot of data points that indicate  
that what is willing to self-identify as risking conspiracy theory  
isn't using basic research in the public domain to see what  
potentially dispositive information can be sourced there.


ZFS is increasingly integrated into the core of Solaris. Is the same  
company that's giving away btrfs going to require engineering a less  
powerful filesystem than zfs just so it can be a differentiator  
between OpenSolaris and Solaris? Are filesystems really on a plane of  
engineering where you want to develop them on an entirely separate  
track from OpenSolaris, where no statement contradicts the premise  
that it remains the development branch of Solaris? Even if you're sold  
on the premise that Oracle are trying to maximise revenue off of  
Solaris at the expense of products bundled with OpenSolaris, I just  
can't get to the point where a rumour like this one seems like a  
credible formulation of how they might go about that. If anything, the  
result here is that a core component of Solaris would suffer from the  
imposition of a more convoluted development model.


These folks running the relevant business lines have already said  
publicly to the OGB that Oracle's corporate management accepts the  
basic premise of OpenSolaris, so why pass the time waiting to learn  
how they're going to make good on this by concocting baroque  
conspiracy theories about how they're going to reverse themselves in  
some material fashion or passing along rumours to that effect?


Am 20 Apr 2010 um 17:51 schrieb Eric D. Mudama:


On Tue, Apr 20 at 11:41, Don Turnbull wrote:
Not to be a conspiracy nut but anyone anywhere could have  
registered that gmail account and supplied that answer.  It would  
be a lot more believable from Mr Kay's Oracle or Sun account.


+1

Glad I wasn't the only one who noticed.

--
Eric D. Mudama
edmud...@mail.bounceswoosh.org

___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss


___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Oracle to no longer support ZFS on OpenSolaris?

[Bob Friesenhahn]

On Tue, 20 Apr 2010, Don Turnbull wrote:

Not to be a conspiracy nut but anyone anywhere could have registered that 
gmail account and supplied that answer.  It would be a lot more believable 
from Mr Kay's Oracle or Sun account.


It is true that gmail accounts are just as free and untrustworthy as 
your own temporary yahoo.com email account.


Next someone with a yahoo.com email account will be posting that Ford 
will no longer supports round tires on their trucks.  Statements to 
the contrary will not be accepted unless they come from a @ford.com 
address.


Bob
--
Bob Friesenhahn
bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/
GraphicsMagick Maintainer,http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Oracle to no longer support ZFS on OpenSolaris?

[Eric D. Mudama]

On Tue, Apr 20 at 11:41, Don Turnbull wrote:
Not to be a conspiracy nut but anyone anywhere could have registered 
that gmail account and supplied that answer.  It would be a lot more 
believable from Mr Kay's Oracle or Sun account.


+1

Glad I wasn't the only one who noticed.

--
Eric D. Mudama
edmud...@mail.bounceswoosh.org

___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Oracle to no longer support ZFS on OpenSolaris?

[Don Turnbull]

Not to be a conspiracy nut but anyone anywhere could have registered 
that gmail account and supplied that answer.  It would be a lot more 
believable from Mr Kay's Oracle or Sun account.


On 4/20/2010 9:40 AM, Ken Gunderson wrote:

On Tue, 2010-04-20 at 13:57 +0100, Dominic Kay wrote:
   

Oracle has no plan to move from ZFS as the principle storage platform
for Solaris 10 and OpenSolaris. It remains key to both data management
and to the OS infrastructure such as root/boot, install and upgrade.
Thanks

Dominic Kay
Product Manager, Filesystems
Oracle
 

I'll take that as a "definitive answer";)

Much appreciated. Thank you.

   

___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Oracle to no longer support ZFS on OpenSolaris?

[Ken Gunderson]

On Tue, 2010-04-20 at 05:48 -0700, Tonmaus wrote:
> Don't copy the netiquette issue you are seeing, as I am talking about nothing 
> but an issue in a post on this forum. Why should I contact the OP off record 
> about this?
> There is no need to read intentions either. I just made clear once more what 
> is obvious from board metadata anyhow.
> Besides that, if we are having a dispute about netiquette, that highlights 
> the potential substance of the topic more than anything else.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Tonmaus

fwiw- the post was to a mailing list handled by the excellent, and these
days defacto standard open source, listserver Mailman. Apparently
backend processing then propagates to Jive forums after stripping URLs.
Hence the missing link when viewed via the forums, opening the potential
for confusion for the unaware.  If you want to follow the link included
in my OP, simply access via Mailman archives, where it is indeed
reproduced intact.

Thank you and have a nice day.

P.S.; Speaking of netiquette, it is also quite nice that Mailman is
smart enough to know to wrap email body text at 72-80 chars.  I've never
admined Jive forum and unsure whether it's tunable but it would be nice
if the powers that be could configure Jive to wrap emails at correct
line lengths.

-- 
Ken Gunderson 

___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Oracle to no longer support ZFS on OpenSolaris?

[Ken Gunderson]

On Tue, 2010-04-20 at 13:57 +0100, Dominic Kay wrote:
> Oracle has no plan to move from ZFS as the principle storage platform
> for Solaris 10 and OpenSolaris. It remains key to both data management
> and to the OS infrastructure such as root/boot, install and upgrade.  
> Thanks
> 
> Dominic Kay
> Product Manager, Filesystems
> Oracle

I'll take that as a "definitive answer";) 

Much appreciated. Thank you.

-- 
Ken Gunderson 

___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Oracle to no longer support ZFS on OpenSolaris?

[Sean Sprague]

Khyron,

Finally, Michael S. made the best recommendation...talk to your sales 
rep if you're

a paying customer.


... but don't expect any commitments or generic answer from them at the 
moment.


I do however congratulate quoting Mr. Harman in your .sig ;-)

Regards... Sean.
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Oracle to no longer support ZFS on OpenSolaris?

[Dominic Kay]

Oracle has no plan to move from ZFS as the principle storage platform for
Solaris 10 and OpenSolaris. It remains key to both data management and to
the OS infrastructure such as root/boot, install and upgrade.
Thanks

Dominic Kay
Product Manager, Filesystems
Oracle

2010/4/20 Khyron 

> This is how rumors get started.
>
> From reading that thread, the OP didn't seem to know much of anything
> about...
> anything.  Even less so about Solaris and OpenSolaris.  I'd advise not to
> get your
> news from mailing lists, especially not mailing lists for people who don't
> use the
> product you're interested in.
>
> Nothing like this has been said anywhere by anyone that even resembles or
> approximates an Oracle representative.  So, yeah, ignore it, as the guy was
>
> just asking dumb questions in a very poor manner about things he has
> absolutely
> no knowledge of, and adding assumptions on top of that, in his best but not
> very
> good English.  At least, that's my impression and opinion.
>
> Finally, Michael S. made the best recommendation...talk to your sales rep
> if you're
> a paying customer.
>
> Cheers!
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 01:18, Ken Gunderson wrote:
>
>> Greetings All:
>>
>> Granted there has been much fear, uncertainty, and doubt following
>> Oracle's take over of Sun, but I ran across this on a FreeBSD mailing
>> list post dated 4/20/2010"
>>
>> "...Seems that Oracle won't offer support for ZFS on opensolaris"
>>
>> Link here to full post here:
>>
>> <
>> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/2010-April/215269.html
>> >
>>
>> It seems like such would be pretty outrageous and the OP either confused
>> or spreading FUD, but then on the other hand there's lot of rumors
>> flying around about hidden agendas behind the 2010.03 delay, and Oracle
>> being Oracle such could be within the realm of possibilities.
>>
>> Given Oracle's information policies we're not likely to know if such is
>> indeed the case until it's a fait accompli but I nonetheless thought
>> this would be the best place to inquire (or perhaps Indiana list, as I
>> assume OP is referencing upcoming opensolaris.com release).
>>
>> Thank you and have a nice day.
>>
>> --
>> Ken Gunderson 
>>
>> ___
>> zfs-discuss mailing list
>> zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
>> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
>>
>
>
>
> --
> "You can choose your friends, you can choose the deals." - Equity Private
>
> "If Linux is faster, it's a Solaris bug." - Phil Harman
>
> Blog - http://whatderass.blogspot.com/
> Twitter - @khyron4eva
>
>
> ___
> zfs-discuss mailing list
> zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
>
>


-- 
Dominic Kay
+44 780 124 6099
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Oracle to no longer support ZFS on OpenSolaris?

[Tonmaus]

Don't copy the netiquette issue you are seeing, as I am talking about nothing 
but an issue in a post on this forum. Why should I contact the OP off record 
about this?
There is no need to read intentions either. I just made clear once more what is 
obvious from board metadata anyhow.
Besides that, if we are having a dispute about netiquette, that highlights the 
potential substance of the topic more than anything else.

Regards,

Tonmaus
-- 
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Oracle to no longer support ZFS on OpenSolaris?

[Sean Sprague]

Tonmaus,


you talking about and to whom were you
responding?
My intention was a response to the OP, which I guess from what I am 
seeing in the jive forum, happened as well. Indeed, my concern was the 
broken link in the first post which would be simple to fix if 
intended. That not being the case increases the smell of FUD.


Sorry. We are not mind(or intention)-readers. If you have a specific 
comment which should be directed to a specific individual, then a forum 
is not the best place to air it. Having said that, "The <...> website 
appears to be down at the moment - anyone fixing it?" is more than 
acceptable. Netiquette rules. To quote you: "Why don't you just fix the 
apparently broken link to your source, then?" is _not_ forum/list material.


Thanks... Sean.
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Oracle to no longer support ZFS on OpenSolaris?

[Tonmaus]

> you talking about and to whom were you
> responding?
 My intention was a response to the OP, which I guess from what I am seeing in 
the jive forum, happened as well. Indeed, my concern was the broken link in the 
first post which would be simple to fix if intended. That not being the case 
increases the smell of FUD.

-Tonmaus
-- 
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Oracle to no longer support ZFS on OpenSolaris?

[Khyron]

I have no idea who you're talking to, but presumably you mean this link:

http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/2010-April/215269.html

Worked fine for me.  I didn't post it.  I'm not the OP on this thread or on
the FreeBSD thread.  So what "broken link" are you talking about and to whom

were you responding?

On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 06:58, Tonmaus  wrote:

> Why don't you just fix the apparently broken link to your source, then?
>
> Regards,
>
> Tonmaus
> --
> This message posted from opensolaris.org
> ___
> zfs-discuss mailing list
> zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
>



-- 
"You can choose your friends, you can choose the deals." - Equity Private

"If Linux is faster, it's a Solaris bug." - Phil Harman

Blog - http://whatderass.blogspot.com/
Twitter - @khyron4eva
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Oracle to no longer support ZFS on OpenSolaris?

[Tonmaus]

Why don't you just fix the apparently broken link to your source, then?

Regards,

Tonmaus
-- 
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Oracle to no longer support ZFS on OpenSolaris?

[Khyron]

This is how rumors get started.

>From reading that thread, the OP didn't seem to know much of anything
about...
anything.  Even less so about Solaris and OpenSolaris.  I'd advise not to
get your
news from mailing lists, especially not mailing lists for people who don't
use the
product you're interested in.

Nothing like this has been said anywhere by anyone that even resembles or
approximates an Oracle representative.  So, yeah, ignore it, as the guy was
just asking dumb questions in a very poor manner about things he has
absolutely
no knowledge of, and adding assumptions on top of that, in his best but not
very
good English.  At least, that's my impression and opinion.

Finally, Michael S. made the best recommendation...talk to your sales rep if
you're
a paying customer.

Cheers!

On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 01:18, Ken Gunderson  wrote:

> Greetings All:
>
> Granted there has been much fear, uncertainty, and doubt following
> Oracle's take over of Sun, but I ran across this on a FreeBSD mailing
> list post dated 4/20/2010"
>
> "...Seems that Oracle won't offer support for ZFS on opensolaris"
>
> Link here to full post here:
>
> <
> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/2010-April/215269.html
> >
>
> It seems like such would be pretty outrageous and the OP either confused
> or spreading FUD, but then on the other hand there's lot of rumors
> flying around about hidden agendas behind the 2010.03 delay, and Oracle
> being Oracle such could be within the realm of possibilities.
>
> Given Oracle's information policies we're not likely to know if such is
> indeed the case until it's a fait accompli but I nonetheless thought
> this would be the best place to inquire (or perhaps Indiana list, as I
> assume OP is referencing upcoming opensolaris.com release).
>
> Thank you and have a nice day.
>
> --
> Ken Gunderson 
>
> ___
> zfs-discuss mailing list
> zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
>



-- 
"You can choose your friends, you can choose the deals." - Equity Private

"If Linux is faster, it's a Solaris bug." - Phil Harman

Blog - http://whatderass.blogspot.com/
Twitter - @khyron4eva
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Oracle to no longer support ZFS on OpenSolaris?

[Michael Schuster]

On 20.04.10 07:52, Ken Gunderson wrote:


On Tue, 2010-04-20 at 12:27 +0700, "C. Bergström" wrote:

Ken Gunderson wrote:

Greetings All:

Granted there has been much fear, uncertainty, and doubt following
Oracle's take over of Sun, but I ran across this on a FreeBSD mailing
list post dated 4/20/2010"

"...Seems that Oracle won't offer support for ZFS on opensolaris"


This guy probably
1) Doesn't know the difference between OpenSolaris and Solaris
2) Doesn't know anything
3) Doesn't cite a source

Stop wasting everyone's time with speculation and FUD


I think from the context of my post it was pretty clear that I viewed
the OP's thread as suspect.  Not being omnipotent, however, the
possibility exists that they may know something I do not, particularly
as the time stamp was very recent.  As I am sincerely interested in
either dispelling or confirming this as the case may be, I posted to the
place I thought most likely to offer a definitive answer.


if you'd been watching this place since the acquisition, you'd know that 
that is not the case - this is primarily an engineering "place", whereas 
answers regarding questions like the one you're floating come from the 
marketing/management side of the house.


The best chance for you to find out about this is to talk to your Oracle 
sales rep.


Michael
--
michael.schus...@oracle.com
Recursion, n.: see 'Recursion'
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Oracle to no longer support ZFS on OpenSolaris?

[Ken Gunderson]

On Tue, 2010-04-20 at 12:27 +0700, "C. Bergström" wrote:
> Ken Gunderson wrote:
> > Greetings All:
> >
> > Granted there has been much fear, uncertainty, and doubt following
> > Oracle's take over of Sun, but I ran across this on a FreeBSD mailing
> > list post dated 4/20/2010"
> >
> > "...Seems that Oracle won't offer support for ZFS on opensolaris"
> >   
> This guy probably
> 1) Doesn't know the difference between OpenSolaris and Solaris
> 2) Doesn't know anything
> 3) Doesn't cite a source
> 
> Stop wasting everyone's time with speculation and FUD

I think from the context of my post it was pretty clear that I viewed
the OP's thread as suspect.  Not being omnipotent, however, the
possibility exists that they may know something I do not, particularly
as the time stamp was very recent.  As I am sincerely interested in
either dispelling or confirming this as the case may be, I posted to the
place I thought most likely to offer a definitive answer.  

-- 
Ken Gunderson 

___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Oracle to no longer support ZFS on OpenSolaris?

[C. Bergström]

Ken Gunderson wrote:

Greetings All:

Granted there has been much fear, uncertainty, and doubt following
Oracle's take over of Sun, but I ran across this on a FreeBSD mailing
list post dated 4/20/2010"

"...Seems that Oracle won't offer support for ZFS on opensolaris"
  

This guy probably
1) Doesn't know the difference between OpenSolaris and Solaris
2) Doesn't know anything
3) Doesn't cite a source

Stop wasting everyone's time with speculation and FUD
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss