This is nothing new. Provide a permissive license and expecting everything to be returned to you is contradictory to the very license you've chose. Forking happens all the time, usually around licensing or management issues. So aside from the little dust storm we've seen recently regarding the wifi driver and the copyright clause I don't see how this is news.
The GPL and BSD type licenses coexist perfectly, so long as both parties take the time to understand each other. Which is mostly the way it's happened
The way I see it, it takes nearly no effort at all to contribute the changes back to the BSD camp that provided you with the base for the code. All else being equal, that seems to be the ethical thing to do.
It takes more effort to change the licensing in such a way that the BSD camp can't use the code. So it's kind of a slap in the face. I think that's where the animosity comes from, especially since the GPL camp proclaims to be all about freedom and sharing.
You can see the changes? Because I could very well take the same code and wrap it into a proprietary package. Maybe make a fortune as I extend the code. But as we all know that's the beauty of the BSD type license: freedom. So the GPL coders take the same code, extend it to suit their needs and offer it to everyone. Only under a license they believe in. And you feel slighted.
For fucks sake, it's forking... (Score:5, Informative)
The GPL and BSD type licenses coexist perfectly, so long as both parties take the time to understand each other. Which is mostly the way it's happened
Re:For fucks sake, it's forking... (Score:4, Interesting)
It takes more effort to change the licensing in such a way that the BSD camp can't use the code. So it's kind of a slap in the face. I think that's where the animosity comes from, especially since the GPL camp proclaims to be all about freedom and sharing.
And it's a slap in the face because... (Score:2)