ZFS on OSX was doomed the moment Oracle bought Sun.
If you want to know why, just contemplate the smoking wreckage of the Oracle/Google Java API lawsuit.
If you want to know why, just contemplate the smoking wreckage of the Oracle/Google Java API lawsuit.
Oracle's beef with Google comes from actions that occurred before Java was open sourced.
It's hard to see how the two scenarios are even remotely related, other than "Oracle"
I have to say it's made me a lot iffier on contributing to open source projects, or at least those owned by for-profit companies.
Oracle's viewpoint on what patents are and are not granted by that license is also interesting (as was Sun's).
Interesting enough that Apple felt they needed to go get a patent license for it, and couldn't come to terms.
http://arstechnica.com/apple/2009/10/apple-abandons-zfs-on-m...
You are correct this happened pre-oracle, but note that it was confirmed by Sun's spokeperson.
(Also note that the national labs, who have been continuing ZFS on linux, are immune to a lot of these issues. Oracle literally cannot get an injunction against them on patent infringement issues, so they are guaranteed they can always work on it)
> Word on the street in Cupertino is that dropping ZFS wasn’t an engineering decision, but a legal one, and it might have had something to do with Oracle’s acquisition of Sun. I don’t know if it was a problem with the terms of the CDDL license, general distrust/dislike for Oracle, or what — only that the word came down from legal that ZFS was a no-go.
Apple has a notoriously paranoid pack of legal sharks, and they clearly felt uncomfortable with something about the ZFS legal situation.