My apologies, on reading again, my first sentence comes across far snarkier than I meant it to be! I thought that the announcement was clear, but reading again, I can see some ambiguities.
I do agree that that Linux probably could use something better than ext4. But Linux also needs something like ZFS.
If Linux's license makes it too difficult to run ZFS, then I can run FreeBSD, Illumos, OpenIndiana, or whatever other open source OS I want in order to get ZFS. But I can't replace ZFS with btrfs, and it doesn't look like btrfs wants to be able to replace ZFS.
I do agree that that Linux probably could use something better than ext4. But Linux also needs something like ZFS.
If Linux's license makes it too difficult to run ZFS, then I can run FreeBSD, Illumos, OpenIndiana, or whatever other open source OS I want in order to get ZFS. But I can't replace ZFS with btrfs, and it doesn't look like btrfs wants to be able to replace ZFS.