Kernel? No. CD? Yes.

Oh, don't worry about that. I try to get out there and say things so that people challenge me and try to correct my misconceptions. So I am much more worried about offending other people, then worrying about them offending me. Since I depend on them.

> Can you point out the problem clause? That'd be news to a good few people.

I think the biggest one is the explicite patent license stuff in second 6 and mentioned other places on the license. This sort of thing is a extra requirement and thus violates the GPL notions of 'no additional restrictions'

I was hoping that the GPLv3 would be more compatible, but as far as the Linux kernel it's going to be GPLv2 for pretty much the rest of enternity at this point.

The CDDL is a fine license otherwise. Much more well suited for what Sun needs.

It's essentially a cleaned up version of the MPL and the Mozilla stuff has to be tripled license to remain GPL compatible.

Different parts of Sun seem to agree with me. Netbeans, for example, is dual licensed under CDDL and GPLv2+classpath exception. Could be just political theater (which isn't bad), but I donno.

I think that Linux developers are generally not going to touch ZFS unless they get a specific nod from Sun itself, probably in the form of a GPL exception or dual license, for the ZFS stuff.