Hope this puts to rest the claim that zfs on bsd is better maintained and integrated than zol!
There is no cause for pride in newly-acquired skills that rest on the backs of giants.
Considering one of thse comes default the base system and the installer can install to it, has jail(8) integration, etc etc
and one of them is an addon which will never be merged to the main kernel (which is only a kernel), and because of this, will likely never be directly supported by the main linux distribution vendors, I'd say the jury is still out on this piece..
lack of base system integration for linuces also leaves the 'maintained' somewhat up in the air too.. if I'm running $linux_flavor and Zfs crashes, and the ZoL devs blame this particular distros particular configuration/build options, toolchain, etc where do I go for a fix?
migrate to another linux with totally different package mgmt, etc?
but yes, it looks like the zfs core code itself is more actively updated for that portion directly.
To the distro of course. How is this even a point of contention?
Zfs is front and center for lxd on Ubuntu - and about as "supported" as can be?
I just can't wait for crypto support to really land in open zfs - would make it even easier to use for external drives (now encryption needs separate support, geli on bsd, dm-crypt/luks on Linux). And using zfs as a volume manager would make things in general easier and less complicated.