I believe Stallman has stated in the past that it was never about the amount of software under the license; in that case, the GPL would have been a failure if i

I believe Stallman has stated in the past that it was never about the amount of software under the license; in that case, the GPL would have been a failure if it fails in accomplishing its aims with any particular piece of software licensed under it, and to my knowledge that hasn't happened (yet). Perhaps oddly, the only software which I know is currently open source thanks to the GPL is Linux, as I imagine there might be more Linux distros that are proprietary (or at least, the kernel would be) if it was not under the GPL. That said, I still license my own software under the AGPL if it's something big or something I'm particularly proud of. The rest goes under public domain (CC0).