[Pkg-zfsonlinux-devel] any news/reply regarding ZFS in NEW?

[Turbo Fredriksson]

On Feb 28, 2014, at 1:29 PM, Robert Millan wrote:

> The proposed package is poorly integrated with existing ZFS packages (e.g. zfsutils for native
> kFreeBSD support).
> 
> First and foremost, there's a namespace grab which is likely to result in trouble, as I explained
> last November (and got no answer)

Why is this a problem?

Also, "eventually" _all_ open source ZFS implementations will be built from the source base.

A couple of months ago, OpenZFS.org was created to merge all (Illumos, BSD*, ZoL etc) current
implementations into one code tree. I don't exactly know the status of OpenZFS, Brian Behlendorf is
active/the driving force in both OpenZFS and ZoL and might know more.

ZoL is currently playing the catch-up game to get it in line with the rest, and I doubt there is some
kind of time schedule but hopefully it won't take to many years :).


So if we rename zfsutils for ZoL now, we'll have to rename it back later. With all the hassle that
will entail (especially since we know going in that we will have to rename it).

> There are also a number of implementation-independant add-ons which would be good practice to
> coordinate in some way with the other ZFS maintainers.

I'll add those then, thanx.

> And annoyingly, there's also been complaints that ZoL developers broke partman-zfs by committing
> porting updates that break existing support on kFreeBSD

!! No "ZoL developer" have "committed porting updates" to partman-zfs !!


_I_ have however, sent in patches to it/them for review, where I have clearly stated that discussion
was needed - and warned about possible breaking it for kBSD and asked for input and comments on
how it worked there so I could write a better patch.

It's very flattering that people thought my stuff was good enough to accept without further review,
but it's also a bit frightening - I'm good, but not THAT good (as we could see :).



On Feb 28, 2014, at 2:00 PM, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez wrote:

> [14:34] <paultag> it's not forgotten, we just haven't had a slice of time to commune about it
> [14:34] <paultag> feel free to email ftpmaster@ and poke
> [14:37] <clopez> Liang Guo did that some weeks ago but he got not reply (AFAIK)
> 
> So, I don't know how more we can do other than wait.

Six months and counting... Ah, well. There's some issues with the following package any way, so maybe
we should take use the time and get it in good shape.

Is it ok/allowed to upload a new package, even though the initial one is still stuck in incoming?