I started writing a reply and then I just remembered I wrote about how I felt about it a little while back. http://eksith.wordpress.com/2008/11/24/gpl-vs-bsd/

I started writing a reply and then I just remembered I wrote about how I felt about it a little while back. http://eksith.wordpress.com/2008/11/24/gpl-vs-bsd/ http://eksith.wordpress.com/2008/11/24/gpl-vs-bsd/ On three separate occasions so far, I've come across a situation where someone has rejected a GPL piece (with basically nothing wrong technically; which is a damn shame) only to go with BSD the first time, ISC the second and, to my surprise, a closed source solution the third. Now 3 may not seem like a statistically significant number, but from the type of projects these were, my feeling is that the GPL seems to actively repel adoption to the point where even a closed source binary is more preferable. The premise is to ensure quality code gets returned to the community, and I understand that, but quality code isn't what we usually get back. When the issue is forced, by and large, I feel people reject participation entirely, return the bare minimum necessary to comply (let's say an API which is GPL licensed while the rest of the library/application is under a different one) or, of course, non-compliance. It's hard not to be a cynic these days, but I do think most people are basically good. And if you give good people the choice of doing good, they will not only do it, but also do it more earnestly. This earnestness in turn will produce, I believe, code of the best quality.