News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:An extensive ZFS setup on MacOS by hultner on Saturday July 07, 2018 @04:33PM (#17480412)
This is a common misconception but in fact the incompatibility is purely accidental, in addition I wouldn’t call GNU/GPL the most pragmatic license family either.
Re:An extensive ZFS setup on MacOS by yjftsjthsd-h on Saturday July 07, 2018 @05:14PM (#17480618)
If it was an accident, then why does the CDDL even exist? What does it offer that MIT/BSD don't have, other than being incompatible with GPL?
Re:An extensive ZFS setup on MacOS by AndrewSnow on Saturday July 07, 2018 @06:33PM (#17481043)
Like Mozilla, per-file copyleft and clearer patent licensing, IIRC.

Some prominent former Sun folks have publicly claimed the GPL incompatibility was intentional, other equally prominent folks have disagreed.

Re:An extensive ZFS setup on MacOS by hultner on Saturday July 07, 2018 @05:19PM (#17480645)
This argument could be made for any license that’s similar to another, I don’t think it’s fair reasoning. Why does 2-Clause BSD exist? Why does Apache license exist?
Re:An extensive ZFS setup on MacOS by yjftsjthsd-h on Saturday July 07, 2018 @05:42PM (#17480768)
That's a good point, though honestly I never could understand why you would use anything but Apache (for permissive) or (A)GPL (for copyleft). Other options seem like oversights (BSD/MIT don't cover patents) or cutting off your nose to spite your face (WTFPL). I'm sure there's nuance, but I can't seem to see it.
Re:An extensive ZFS setup on MacOS by nine_k on Saturday July 07, 2018 @07:15PM (#17481209)
MIT license and BSD license seem to long predate Apache.

GPL and AGPL differ vastly in a few important aspects that make GPL pretty OK for commercial companies, and AGPL an absolute no-no.