What's the problem of D...,D will be dead?

[Wolfgang Draxinger]

David Medlock wrote:

> GPL is poison to a lot of business interests, vis a vis
> software which they must release with their products.

You realize, that using a GPLed compiler does not imply, that the
output it GPL, too. As long as you don't incorporate GPL code
into you program you are not bound to GPL.

For example the software I'm developing is ofently licenced under
a Apache, MPL or BSD like licence. But not all. Software which I
want to get money for is always licenced unter a GPL/dual
licence, which boils down to about the same licensing terms like
Trolltech's Qt Licence: Software is OpenSource, but using it in
a CSS or commercial application requires obtaining a licence; if
the software is going to be GPL, then you may use my stuff for
free. If software developed with my stuff is again published
under a dual licence (like e.g. MySQL), it's considered
commercial, but licencing fees are much lower.
 
> If non-GPL is so bad, what is the deal with Apache and Mozilla?
>  Is their popularity a fluke?

Those are usually compiled with GCC, which is GPLed, yet they're
not infected by GPL.

Just my 2 cents.

-- 
Wolfgang Draxinger