[tylercrompton]

> Not integrating so well with other open source licenses is one of the cons.

That depends on what you want. If you want a license that will play well with closed source software, then yeah, it's a downside. But the GPL family comes from the perspective of a developer who wants to retain their rights while respecting others' desire for the same. If you care about your rights, then this is an upside.

[kaba0]

CDDL (ZFS’s license) is also like that, the problem is exactly the two “strong” copyleft licenses.

[jakobson14]

https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html#CDDL

>"It has a weak per-file copyleft (like version 1 of the Mozilla Public License)"

The CDDL isn't a strong copyleft licence. It doesn't give a shit what larger project you include the code into, and it doesn't give a shit how you licence the resulting binary. It's considerably more permissive than the GPL.

The conflict is entirely on the GPL side.