Hubbry Logo
Common Development and Distribution LicenseCommon Development and Distribution LicenseMain
Open search
Common Development and Distribution License
Community hub
Common Development and Distribution License
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Common Development and Distribution License
Common Development and Distribution License
Common Development and Distribution License
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
Common Development and Distribution License
AuthorSun Microsystems, Oracle Corporation
Latest version1.1
PublisherOracle Corporation
SPDX identifierCDDL-1.1
CDDL-1.0
Debian FSG compatibleYes
FSF approvedYes (only 1.0)[1]
OSI approvedYes (only 1.0)[2]
GPL compatibleNo[1]
CopyleftYes, file-level[1]
Linking from code with a different licenceYes[1]

The Common Development and Distribution License (CDDL) is a free and open-source software license,[3] produced by Sun Microsystems, based on the Mozilla Public License (MPL). Files licensed under the CDDL can be combined with files licensed under other licenses, whether open source or proprietary.[2] In 2005 the Open Source Initiative approved the license. The Free Software Foundation (FSF) considers it a free software license, but one which is incompatible with the GNU General Public License (GPL).[1]

Terms

[edit]

Derived from the Mozilla Public License 1.1,[4] the CDDL tries to address some of the problems of the MPL.[5] Like the MPL, the CDDL is a weak copyleft license in-between GPL license and BSD/MIT permissive licenses, requiring only source code files under CDDL to remain under CDDL.

Unlike strong copyleft licenses like the GPL, mixing of CDDL licensed source code files with source code files under other licenses is permitted without relicensing. The resulting compiled software product ("binary") can be licensed and sold under a different license, as long as the source code is still available under CDDL, which should enable more commercial business cases, according to Sun.[5][6][7]

Like the MPL the CDDL includes a patent grant to the licensee from all contributors ("patent peace"). However, in section 2.1(d), the patent grant is lost if the code implementing a patented feature is modified.[8]

History

[edit]

The previous software license used by Sun for its open source projects was the Sun Public License (SPL), also derived from the Mozilla Public License. The CDDL license is considered by Sun (now Oracle) to be SPL version 2.[9]

The CDDL was developed by a Sun Microsystems team (among them Solaris kernel engineer Andrew Tucker[10][11] and Claire Giordano[12]), based on the MPL version 1.1. On December 1, 2004 the CDDL was submitted for approval to the Open Source Initiative[12] and was approved as an open source license in mid January 2005. The second CDDL proposal, submitted in early January 2005, includes some corrections that prevent the CDDL from being in conflict with European Copyright law and to allow single developers to use the CDDL for their work.

In 2006, in the first draft of the OSI's license proliferation committee report, the CDDL is one of nine preferred licenses listed as popular, widely used, or with strong communities.[13]

While the Free Software Foundation (FSF) also considered the CDDL a free software license, they saw some incompatibilities with their GNU General Public License (GPL).[1]

GPL compatibility

[edit]

The question of whether and when both licenses are incompatible sparked debates in the free software domain in 2004 to 2006.[14][15] For instance, the FSF considered the CDDL incompatible to their GPL license, without going into detail until 2016.[16]

CDDL is one of several Open Source Licenses which are incompatible with GPL. This characteristic was inherited from the MPL 1.1 (fixed with the MPL 2.0 according to the FSF[1]) and results from a complex interaction of several clauses;[14][17] the root of the problem being GPL virality, similar to other cases of GPL incompatibility.[18] Some people argue that Sun (or the Sun engineer) as creator of the license made the CDDL intentionally GPL incompatible.[14] According to Danese Cooper one of the reasons for basing the CDDL on the Mozilla license was that the Mozilla license is GPL-incompatible. Cooper stated, at the 6th annual Debian conference, that the engineers who had written the Solaris kernel requested that the license of OpenSolaris be GPL-incompatible.[19]

Mozilla was selected partially because it is GPL incompatible. That was part of the design when they released OpenSolaris. ... the engineers who wrote Solaris ... had some biases about how it should be released, and you have to respect that.

Simon Phipps (Sun's Chief Open Source Officer at the time), who had introduced Cooper as "the one who actually wrote the CDDL",[20] did not immediately comment, but later in the same video, he says, referring back to the license issue, "I actually disagree with Danese to some degree",[21] while describing the strong preference among the engineers who wrote the code for a BSD-like license, which was in conflict with Sun's preference for something copyleft, and that waiting for legal clearance to release some parts of the code under the then unreleased GNU GPL v3 would have taken several years, and would probably also have involved mass resignations from engineers (unhappy with either the delay, the GPL, or both—this is not clear from the video).

Later, in September 2006, Phipps rejected Cooper's assertion in even stronger terms.[22] Similarly, Bryan Cantrill, who was at Sun at that time and involved in the release of CDDL licensed software stated in 2015 that he and his colleagues expected in 2006 the fast emergence of CDDL licensed software into the Linux ecosystem and the CDDL being not an obstacle.[23]

cdrtools controversy

[edit]

The GPL compatibility question was also the source of a controversy behind a partial relicensing of cdrtools to the CDDL which had been previously all GPL. In 2006, the Debian project declared the cdrtools legally undistributable because the build system was licensed under the CDDL.[24]

The author, Jörg Schilling, claimed that smake is an independent project and does not violate the GPLv3.[25] Schilling also argued that even though the GPL requires all scripts required to build the work to be licensed freely, they do not necessarily have to be under the GPL.[26][27][page needed] Thus not causing an incompatibility that violates the license.

He also argued that in "combined works" (in contrast to "derived works") GPL and CDDL licensed code is compatible.[28][29]

Red Hat's attorneys have prevented cdrtools from being in Fedora or Red Hat Enterprise Linux, arguing that Schilling has an "unorthodox" view of copyright law that isn't shared by their legal counsel or the Free Software Foundation.[30]

ZFS in the Linux kernel

[edit]

In 2015, the CDDL to GPL compatibility question reemerged when Ubuntu announced inclusion of OpenZFS by default.[31]

In 2016 Ubuntu announced that a legal review resulted in the conclusion that it is legally acceptable to use ZFS as binary kernel module in Linux. (As opposed to building it into the kernel image itself.)[32]

Others followed Ubuntu's conclusion, for instance James E. J. Bottomley argued there cannot be "a convincing theory of harm" developed, making it impossible to bring the case to court.[33]

Eben Moglen, co-author of the GPLv3 and founder of the SFLC, argued that while the letter of the GPL might be violated, the spirit of both licenses is unharmed, which would be the relevant aspect in court.[34]

The SFLC mentioned also that a precedent exists with the Andrew File System's kernel module, which is not considered a derivative work of the kernel by the kernel developers.[35][36]

On the other hand, Bradley M. Kuhn and attorney Karen M. Sandler from the Software Freedom Conservancy[37] argued that Ubuntu would violate both licenses, as a binary ZFS module would be a derivative work of the kernel.[38] In April 2016, the Ubuntu 16.04 LTS release included the CDDL-licensed ZFS on Linux.[citation needed]

Adoption

[edit]

Example projects released under CDDL:

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Common Development and Distribution License

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
The Common Development and Distribution License (CDDL) is a permissive weak license that allows users to reproduce, modify, and distribute software while requiring that any modifications to the covered be made available under the same license terms. It was originally developed by in 2004 as a successor to the Sun Public License, drawing inspiration from the version 1.1 to facilitate easier and community contributions without imposing project-wide obligations. Key features of the CDDL include its file-level application, meaning that only the specific files derived from CDDL-licensed code must remain under the CDDL, while allowing integration into larger works licensed differently, such as proprietary software. The license grants broad rights for commercial use, modification, and patent licensing, but mandates the provision of source code alongside any distributed executable versions of covered software and includes provisions for termination in cases of patent litigation against contributors. Approved by the Open Source Initiative in 2005, the CDDL version 1.0 remains the primary variant in use, with version 1.1, approved by the OSI in 2025, introducing minor clarifications for European copyright law. The CDDL gained prominence through its adoption for Sun's project in 2005, enabling the open-sourcing of Solaris components and fostering derivatives like and . It is compatible with licenses like and BSD but incompatible with the General Public License due to differences in reciprocity requirements, which has led to notable debates in open-source communities over code sharing. Following 's acquisition of Sun in 2009, stewardship passed to , though the license continues to support collaborative development in various projects.

Background

Origins and Development

The Common Development and Distribution License (CDDL) was developed by in 2004 as a successor to the Sun Public License (SPL), primarily to respond to community concerns about the SPL's perceived lack of openness and to create a more standardized, reusable licensing framework for projects. This effort was led by key figures including Simon Phipps, Sun's Chief Open Source Officer, who coordinated the company's broader push into during this period. Following the dot-com bust in the early 2000s, Sun underwent a strategic pivot toward greater engagement, aiming to foster collaboration while protecting its enterprise-oriented intellectual property, which influenced the CDDL's design as a weak license. Sun submitted the CDDL to the (OSI) for approval on December 2, 2004, and it received official OSI approval on January 14, 2005. The license drew foundational influence from the (MPL), adapting its structure to better suit Sun's needs for modularity and compatibility in large-scale software ecosystems. The primary purpose of the CDDL was to govern the release of components, providing a permissive yet protective licensing model that balanced developer freedoms with safeguards for contributions in an enterprise context, while also making it attractive for reuse across other open-source initiatives. This approach allowed Sun to open-source significant portions of Solaris without compromising its commercial interests, marking a milestone in the company's open-source strategy.

Influences from Other Licenses

The Common Development and Distribution License (CDDL) was directly derived from the (MPL) version 1.1, adopting its core structure of file-level , which requires that modifications to individual source files remain under the same license while allowing those files to be combined into larger works under different terms. This approach contrasted with the stronger "work-as-a-whole" of the (GPL), enabling greater flexibility for integration with or permissively licensed without propagating obligations to the entire project. The CDDL also retained and refined MPL's patent grant provisions, introducing a "patent peace" clause that broadly terminates rights for contributors who assert patents against others, thereby promoting collaborative development without the royalty-related complexities in the MPL. Compared to its predecessor, the Sun Public License (SPL)—itself a variant of the MPL—the CDDL removed Sun Microsystems-specific branding and references, such as mentions of Sun as the sole initial steward, to create a more neutral and reusable license for broader adoption. It also simplified compatibility provisions by streamlining the list of compatible licenses (including MPL, BSD, , and others) and clarifying linkage rules, reducing the administrative burden on users relative to the SPL's more restrictive and company-tied language. The CDDL incorporated permissive elements reminiscent of the License 2.0, particularly in its explicit and defensive patent licensing, which grants recipients a clear license to contributor patents while allowing defensive termination—features that aligned with Apache 2.0's contemporaneous emphasis on patent protection to encourage commercial participation. However, the CDDL maintained a hybrid character through its weak , balancing MPL-style source-sharing requirements with Apache-like permissiveness to support both and proprietary extensions, as seen in Sun's open-sourcing of Solaris components. During the Open Source Initiative's (OSI) approval process in 2004–2005, reviewers noted that the CDDL addressed key ambiguities in the MPL regarding "larger works," such as the vague clause distinguishing modifications from separate contributions, by explicitly removing it and clarifying that applies only to modified files within combined distributions. This refinement enhanced clarity and reduced potential disputes over what constituted a "larger work," facilitating easier integration of CDDL-licensed code into diverse projects.

Terms

Permissions and Grants

The Common Development and Distribution License (CDDL) provides explicit permissions and grants under Section 2, which outlines the rights afforded to licensees for using, modifying, and distributing the covered software. These grants are conditioned on compliance with the license's terms and are subject to third-party claims, ensuring a balanced framework for open-source collaboration. Section 2.1 establishes the Initial Developer Grant, whereby the initial developer of the original software confers a worldwide, , non-exclusive . This includes rights under (excluding and trademarks) to use, reproduce, modify, display, perform, sublicense, and distribute the original software or portions thereof, either standalone or as part of a larger work that may incorporate non-CDDL components. Additionally, it grants a for claims infringed by making, using, or selling the original software, allowing licensees to make, have made, use, practice, sell, offer for sale, and otherwise dispose of it without fear of patent suits from the initial developer. These licenses become effective upon the initial developer's first distribution of the software under the CDDL. However, the patent grant excludes code deleted from the original software and does not cover infringements from modifications or combinations with other software or devices. Section 2.2 extends similar protections through the Contributor Grant, applicable to each individual or entity that contributes modifications. Each contributor provides a worldwide, , non-exclusive under their licensable rights (excluding and trademarks) to use, reproduce, modify, display, perform, sublicense, and distribute their modifications, either unmodified, combined with other modifications, as covered software, or as part of a larger work. The grant covers claims infringed by making, using, or selling these modifications alone or in combination with the contributor's version of the software, enabling the same dispositive rights as in the initial grant. These contributor licenses activate upon the first distribution of the modifications. Like the initial grant, the license excludes deleted code, third-party modifications, combinations with non-contributor software (except within the contributor version), and claims infringed by covered software absent the contributor's modifications. A key aspect of these grants is their accommodation of proprietary extensions in larger works, where CDDL-covered software can be combined with or differently licensed code without imposing CDDL terms on the non-covered portions. This file-based scope limits the grants and obligations to the specific covered files, facilitating integration with systems while protecting the open-source core— for instance, allowing linking of CDDL-licensed libraries with closed-source applications. The explicit grants from both initial developers and contributors further mitigate risks of litigation, promoting contributions by assuring users of defense against contributor-initiated claims related to the licensed material.

Copyleft Obligations

The Common Development and Distribution License (CDDL) implements a weak mechanism that primarily enforces obligations on modifications to covered software, ensuring that such changes remain available under the same terms. Under Section 3.2, any modifications created or contributed to the original software must be governed by the CDDL, with contributors required to affirm that the changes are their original creations or that they hold sufficient rights to grant the necessary licenses. This provision promotes ongoing for works while limiting the scope of enforcement to the modified elements themselves. A defining feature of the CDDL's copyleft is its file-by-file application, which means obligations only extend to individual files containing the original software or modifications, rather than propagating to an entire combined work. As a result, when CDDL-covered files are integrated into larger software distributions, only alterations to those specific files trigger relicensing requirements under the CDDL, allowing flexibility in combining with other licensed components. This per-file approach contrasts with stronger licenses by avoiding demands on unmodified or non-CDDL elements. Preservation of notices is a core obligation to maintain attribution and transparency. Section 3.3 mandates that each modification include a notice identifying the contributor responsible for it, while prohibiting the removal or alteration of any existing , , , notices, or attributions to the initial developer or other contributors. These requirements ensure that the provenance of changes is clearly documented in distributions. The CDDL's weak does not impose obligations to open-source linked or combined with CDDL components. Section 3.5 permits the distribution of executable versions under a different , provided that the source for the CDDL-covered portions remains available under CDDL terms, and Section 3.6 explicitly allows integration into larger works without forcing the entire product to adopt CDDL. This enables extensions or applications to utilize CDDL software while complying only with the license's targeted requirements.

Patent and Termination Provisions

The Common Development and Distribution License (CDDL) includes an explicit grant from the initial developer to licensees, providing a worldwide, , non-exclusive under claims infringed by the original software for making, using, offering to sell, selling, importing, and otherwise transferring the software. This grant, outlined in Section 2.1, excludes coverage for claims related to code that was removed from the original software or infringements arising from modifications or combinations with other software. A key defensive mechanism in Section 6.2 causes all rights granted under Sections 2.1 and 2.2 to terminate if the or any of its affiliates institutes litigation against the initial developer or any other contributor alleging infringement related to the covered software, unless the claim is withdrawn within 60 days of notice. This provision acts as a retaliation , revoking all protections to deter licensees from using patents offensively against upstream contributors, thereby encouraging mutual non-aggression in collaborations. The CDDL's termination provisions extend beyond patents to general license compliance. Under Section 6.1, the entire terminates automatically if the licensee breaches any term and fails to cure the breach within 30 days of receiving , though reinstatement occurs upon cure. Certain sections, such as disclaimers and surviving rights for end-user sublicenses under Section 6.3, remain effective post-termination. Section 6.2 reinforces the defensive termination by specifying that if a asserts a against the initial developer or a contributor related to the covered software, all rights terminate 60 days after written notice unless the claim is withdrawn or dismissed. Complementing these termination rules, Section 5 disclaims all warranties, providing the covered software "" without any express or implied warranties, including merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, or non-infringement. bear full responsibility for risks, costs, and liabilities associated with the software's quality, performance, or use.

History

Initial Release and Early Debates

The Common Development and Distribution License (CDDL) was first submitted to the (OSI) for approval on December 2, 2004, and received formal approval on January 14, 2005, enabling its use in open source projects. announced the CDDL on January 25, 2005, in conjunction with the launch of the project, positioning it as the primary license for Solaris-derived code to foster community contributions while addressing limitations of Sun's prior Sun Public License (SPL), which had not been OSI-approved due to concerns over its compatibility and restrictions. The CDDL was derived from the (MPL) version 1.1, with modifications to improve interoperability and resolve SPL-related issues, such as clarifying patent grants and file-level to allow linking with a broader range of licenses without imposing project-wide requirements. In January 2005, shortly after OSI approval, the (FSF) endorsed the CDDL as a , affirming it met the criteria for user freedoms to run, study, modify, and distribute the software. However, the FSF simultaneously declared the CDDL incompatible with the GNU General Public License (GPL), citing conflicts in licensing requirements, particularly around patent provisions and scope that prevented seamless combination of CDDL- and GPL-licensed code in derivative works. This stance highlighted early tensions in the community, as the CDDL's design intentionally diverged from GPL compatibility to protect Sun's interests while enabling open collaboration. From 2004 to 2006, debates emerged among engineers and advocates over the CDDL's implications for broader adoption, including potential dual-licensing options to align with the GPL. Engineers like Danese Cooper, a key contributor to the CDDL's development, argued for its structure as a deliberate choice to avoid GPL entanglements, emphasizing that basing it on the MPL ensured incompatibility to prevent unintended relicensing obligations that could complicate Sun's commercial offerings. In response, FSF legal counsel countered that specific clauses, such as the CDDL's "patent peace" provision in section 6, created irreconcilable conflicts with GPL's uniform , undermining efforts for dual-licensing and limiting integration with GPL-based ecosystems like . These discussions, often aired on mailing lists and forums, underscored the CDDL's role in balancing protections with principles. The OSI approval process further shaped early perceptions by validating the CDDL as an , resolving SPL's prior shortcomings like ambiguous contributor grants and concerns through targeted revisions in the January 2005 version. Community feedback in 2005 praised the CDDL's weak mechanism—requiring source disclosure only for modified files—as a pragmatic bridge between permissive licenses like BSD and strong copyleft models like the GPL, allowing flexible integration without aggressive reciprocity. For instance, maintainer noted its LGPL-like qualities, enabling use in larger proprietary or mixed-license works without violating terms, which encouraged initial adoption in diverse projects. This positioned the CDDL as a compromise fostering innovation in enterprise environments while maintaining essential tenets.

cdrtools Controversy

The project, a suite of utilities for CD/DVD recording and manipulation developed and maintained by Jörg Schilling, was originally released under the GNU General Public License (GPL). In May 2006, Schilling relicensed significant portions of the codebase, including the core cdrecord tool and the libscg library, to the Common Development and Distribution License (CDDL), while leaving the mkisofs component under the GPL. This partial relicensing was motivated by ongoing disputes with maintainers, particularly over alleged GPL compliance issues and personal conflicts, rather than direct corporate influence. The mixed licensing created immediate challenges, as the project's build system (smake) was also placed under the CDDL, making it difficult or impossible to compile the remaining GPL-licensed components without incorporating CDDL code, which violated GPL terms. In response, the project declared legally undistributable in August 2006 and removed it from their repositories, citing the incompatibility between the CDDL and GPL in a combined project. Schilling contested this decision, arguing that the relicensing enhanced user freedoms and that Debian's claims were unfounded, but he refused to revert the changes or fully relicense the entire project under a single compatible license, exacerbating the standoff. The controversy prompted the community to the last fully GPL-compatible version of , resulting in the creation of the cdrkit project (including tools like wodim as a cdrecord replacement) to maintain a distributable alternative. Schilling, in turn, continued development under his Schily Tools umbrella, incorporating new features such as Blu-ray support, while criticizing the as buggy and incomplete. This highlighted broader tensions between independent project maintainers and collaborative distribution efforts, particularly in navigating corporate-backed licenses like the CDDL amid GPL-dominated ecosystems. No legal action ensued from the dispute, and it ultimately resolved through the persistence of the community , with many distributions adopting cdrkit while others, such as , later reinstated Schilling's original tools after legal reviews confirmed their compliance. The episode underscored the CDDL's practical difficulties in mixed-license environments, amplifying ongoing debates about its incompatibility with the GPL.

in Issues

ZFS was originally developed by starting in 2001 and released as in 2005 under the Common Development and Distribution License (CDDL) as part of the project. Following Oracle's acquisition of Sun in 2010 and the subsequent discontinuation of , the project was formed in 2013 as a community-driven , combining ZFS implementations from , , and to continue development independently of Oracle's proprietary Solaris ZFS. The integration of into the GPL-licensed sparked significant licensing debates from 2010 to 2016, primarily due to the incompatibility between the CDDL and GPLv2. A key concern centered on GPLv2 Section 7, which addresses additional terms imposed on the combined work; critics argued that the CDDL's requirements, such as file-by-file , could impose conflicting obligations, potentially triggering the "viral" propagation of additional terms and violating the GPL by preventing the combined binary from being licensed solely under GPLv2. In 2016, advanced ZFS support by including pre-built binary kernel modules (zfs.ko) in its 16.04 LTS release, enabling native use for features like snapshots and compression in containers, despite warnings from organizations like the that this distribution constituted a GPL violation due to the unresolved license conflict. Legal opinions in 2016, including one from the Software Freedom Law Center, addressed these issues by concluding that distributing ZFS as binary kernel modules does not violate the GPL, provided no source code mingling occurs between ZFS and Linux components, as the CDDL permits redistribution of binaries under any license while keeping ZFS source separate under CDDL terms. This approach allowed distributions to avoid direct integration of ZFS source into the kernel tree, sidestepping potential copyright infringement or termination of GPL rights. Today, continues to be deployed via dynamic kernel modules in distributions such as and Proxmox VE, where it supports advanced storage features like RAID-Z and self-healing without requiring manual compilation, and no successful legal challenges to this practice have been reported. The broader CDDL-GPL incompatibility remains a foundational issue, limiting to modular rather than in-tree kernel inclusion.

Recent Developments

Version 1.1 Update

The Common Development and Distribution License (CDDL) version 1.1 was submitted to the (OSI) by Brian Warner on May 2, 2025, and subsequently approved on July 18, 2025, as an update to the original 2004 license developed by . This release represents a minor revision aimed at maintaining relevance for existing codebases while preserving full compatibility with version 1.0. CDDL 1.1 introduces several targeted clarifications to the text of version 1.0, remaining largely identical in structure and intent. Key changes include updating references from "" to "" as the license steward in section 4.1, reflecting Oracle's acquisition of Sun in 2010. A new section 6.3 addresses termination provisions by accounting for the value of any license granted in resolved infringement claims, aligning the with contemporary practices. Additionally, section 7 revises the liability limitation by removing the phrase "LOST PROFITS," and a choice-of-venue is added, specifying the Northern District of Federal Courts or Santa Clara County Superior Courts for disputes. These tweaks enhance precision without altering core permissions or obligations. The motivations for CDDL 1.1 centered on completing the OSI's list of legacy open-source licenses and providing clarity for ongoing use in major Java-based projects, where the license has been detected in software composition analyses. By classifying it as a legacy license, the OSI emphasized its role in supporting for historical software distributions, ensuring no disruption to projects relying on the original terms. This update underscores the license's enduring application in enterprise environments without necessitating broad revisions.

Post-2020 Legal and Compatibility Clarifications

In the period from 2021 to 2024, (FSF) re-affirmed its longstanding position that (CDDL) remains incompatible with (GPL), citing irreconcilable differences in copyleft scopes and distribution requirements that prevent direct combination of CDDL- and GPL-licensed code. This stance was reiterated in FSF documentation and compliance guidance, emphasizing that while CDDL code can be dual-licensed under additional permissive terms by original contributors, such arrangements do not resolve the incompatibility when integrating with GPL-licensed works, though they may permit scenarios like dual-licensing with (AGPL) in isolated components without forming a . These re-affirmations underscore the FSF's recommendation to avoid CDDL for projects aiming for GPL compatibility, building on historical analyses like the ZFS-Linux integration debates. No major court cases specifically involving CDDL violations or interpretations have been reported between 2021 and 2024, reflecting the license's relative stability in legal challenges.

Adoption

In Core Projects and Ecosystems

The Common Development and Distribution License (CDDL) has been central to several major open-source projects originating from , particularly within operating systems and related technologies. , launched in 2005, represented Sun's effort to open-source its proprietary Solaris operating system, releasing the bulk of its codebase under the CDDL to foster contributions while protecting through file-based provisions. This initiative included key components like the kernel, networking stack, and utilities, enabling developers to build and distribute derivatives as long as CDDL-licensed files remained unchanged in licensing. remained active until 2010, when discontinued releases following its acquisition of Sun, but its codebase continues to influence modern systems. Following the end of , the project emerged in 2010 as a community-driven , preserving and extending the codebase under the CDDL to maintain an open Unix operating . focuses on kernel enhancements, device drivers, and libraries, with all contributions expected to adhere to CDDL terms unless explicitly approved otherwise, ensuring compatibility with upstream integrations from other open-source licenses. Active as of 2025, powers various distributions such as and OmniOS, emphasizing stability for server and storage environments. The file system, initially developed by , with its released open-source in November 2005 as part of and first integrated into Solaris 10 Update 1 in June 2006, exemplifies CDDL's role in innovative storage technologies. ZFS introduced pooled storage, snapshots, and checks, with its distributed under CDDL to allow while requiring derivative files to retain the license. Post-Sun, the project unified development across platforms, maintaining CDDL licensing for implementations in —integrated since version 7.0 for native support—and via the ZFS on Linux (ZoL) module, which provides kernel-level compatibility without altering the core license. These ports enable ZFS use in diverse ecosystems, from embedded systems to enterprise storage arrays. In the Java enterprise space, Sun Microsystems released GlassFish in 2006 as an open-source for Java EE, dual-licensed under CDDL and the GNU License (GPL) with Classpath exception to balance community accessibility and commercial flexibility. GlassFish includes components like the runtime, web services stack, and persistence APIs, where CDDL ensured that modifications to licensed files propagated the terms, supporting related Oracle Java EE tools. Oracle stewarded the project after acquiring Sun until 2018, when it was donated to the and rebranded as Eclipse GlassFish, now maintained under the (EPL) 2.0. Modules such as and Open ESB, originally under CDDL, facilitated adoption in web application development during Oracle's tenure.

Broader Organizational Use

Following the 2010 acquisition of , has maintained the use of the CDDL for key components of 11 and later releases, including aspects of its open-source codebase such as storage features in related appliances. This continuity ensures that developers and users can access and modify licensed portions under the CDDL terms while provides proprietary extensions under separate agreements. In community-driven initiatives, the project—a of —relies entirely on the CDDL for its kernel and system libraries, fostering ongoing development of operating systems outside Oracle's ecosystem. Distributions built on illumos, such as Nexenta OS from Nexenta Systems (acquired by DDN Storage in 2019), incorporate the CDDL to enable hybrid open-source storage solutions for enterprise and use. These efforts highlight the license's role in sustaining vibrant, non-proprietary alternatives to commercial Unix variants. Corporate adoption extends to specialized tools and platforms, with companies like (acquired by in 2016) leveraging CDDL-licensed components in their Triton cloud infrastructure for container orchestration and . The CDDL's file-based structure has facilitated its integration into containerized environments, such as Docker setups utilizing for persistent storage, due to its compatibility with permissive licenses in modular deployments. In July 2025, the approved CDDL version 1.1, potentially encouraging further adoptions in hybrid cloud and edge scenarios without full obligations.

References

  1. https://opensource.org/license/cddl-1-0
  2. https://fossa.com/blog/open-source-licenses-101-cddl-common-development-distribution-license/
  3. https://www.mend.io/blog/top-10-cddl-questions-answered/
  4. https://opensource.org/license/cddl-1-1
  5. https://www.linuxinsider.com/story/sun-releases-solaris-code-under-cddl-license-40030.html
  6. https://www.linuxjournal.com/article/9624
  7. https://www.cnet.com/tech/tech-industry/sun-license-gets-open-source-nod/
  8. https://www.e-channelnews.com/sun-announces-open-source-license-for-solaris-operating-system/
  9. https://web.archive.org/web/20090304142159/http://www.sun.com/cddl/CDDL_why_details.html
  10. https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/2004-December/009124.html
  11. https://web.archive.org/web/20050214114513/http://www.sun.com/cddl/CDDL_why_summary.html
  12. https://spdx.org/licenses/CDDL-1.0.html
  13. https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#CDDL
  14. https://lwn.net/Articles/114839/
  15. https://www.fsf.org/licensing/zfs-and-linux
  16. https://dwheeler.com/essays/gpl-compatible.html
  17. https://www.osnews.com/story/9074/linus-torvalds-comments-on-suns-cddl-license/
  18. https://lwn.net/Articles/195167/
  19. https://lwn.net/Articles/346540/
  20. https://openzfs.org/wiki/History
  21. https://ubuntu.com/blog/zfs-is-the-fs-for-containers-in-ubuntu-16-04
  22. https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2016/feb/25/zfs-and-linux/
  23. https://softwarefreedom.org/resources/2016/linux-kernel-cddl.html
  24. https://pve.proxmox.com/wiki/ZFS_on_Linux
  25. https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2025-May/005756.html
  26. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing/CDDL
  27. https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html
  28. https://github.com/illumos/illumos-gate
  29. https://arstechnica.com/uncategorized/2005/11/5595-2/
  30. https://openzfs.org/wiki/FAQ
  31. http://www.linux-magazine.com/Online/News/Sun-Presents-Glassfish-Server-v2
  32. https://www.oracle.com/java/technologies/java-ee-modules-jsp-downloads.html
  33. https://glassfish.org/
  34. https://docs.oracle.com/en/engineered-systems/private-cloud-appliance/3.0/licensing-3.0.2/licensing-component-zfs.html
  35. https://docs.oracle.com/cd/E53394_01/html/E54836/osplg-tparty.html
  36. https://docs.smartos.org/community-history/
  37. https://github.com/Nexenta/illumos-nexenta
  38. https://www.usenix.org/legacy/event/lisa11/tech/slides/cantrill.pdf
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.