Edward Ned Harvey wrote > I don't know if anyone has real numbers, dollars contributed or number of > developer hours etc, but I think it's fair to say that oracle is probably > contributing more to the closed source ZFS right now, than the rest of the > world is contributing to the open source ZFS right now. Also, we know that > the closed source ZFS right now is more advanced than the open source ZFS > (zpool 31 vs 28). Oracle closed source ZFS is ahead, and probably > developing faster too, than the open source ZFS right now.
> If anyone has any good way to draw more contributors into the open source > tree, that would also be useful and appreciated. Gosh, it would be nice to > get major players like Dell, HP, IBM, Apple contributing into that project. This is something that Illumos/Open source ZFS needs to decide what it wants, effectively we can't innovate ZFS without breaking capability... because our Illumos ZPool version 29 (if we innovate) will not be Oracle Zpool version 29. If we want open-source ZFS to we need to make that choice and let everyone know, apart from submitting bug fixes to zpool v28, are I'm not sure if other changed would be welcome? So honestly do we want to innovate ZFS (I do) or do we just want to follow Oracle? Bye, Deano de...@cloudpixies.com _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
