If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
If they really wanted to use BSD code, then so be it. It wouldn't affect the existing BSD projects in any way (i.e. they would still be open source).
BSD code will live on to solve real problems in corporate, government, academic and open source environments (and already has). I mean, imagine the applications of LAPACK and BLAS (used by everyone) for example ... now try imagining the same for GSL.
Some implementations have support for parallel execution of functions on a multiprocessor computer systems with shared memory. Analog computer with distributed memory are libraries ScaLAPACK  and PLAPACK  .
I see, you can't read - everyone has forked it and closed it down. Who uses LAPACK except BSD?
Those specialty ones are for high performance computing. Matlab, for example, still uses the original netlib version (BSD licensed). Don't believe me? Purchase Matlab and look in their library directory. I think octave uses LAPACK and BLAS (also the BSDL versions) also ...
Nobody uses GSL and why would you? If you're a developer (open source or not) and you want to use your own license ... would you pick GSL to do your math computations? GSL is not free. It's fine if you use GPL though.
And let's not forget other high impact libraries such as libpng (also BSDL) ...
EDIT: I'm mistaken, libpng is not BSDL.
My point is that I suspect that BSDL code (particularly when dealing with libraries) will be preferred over GPL and LGPL code ... and subsequently be more widely adopted and more widely used to solve everything from trivial to big problems.