Thank you for your thoughts.
Am Sonntag, den 08.03.2009, 17:29 -0400 schrieb "Andrés G. Aragoneses":
So, similarly to the AGPL case, there's another special scenario in which proprietary ISVs can take advantage of GPL/AGPL software without being forced to open their software. It's another case of the need of having a more restrictive clause to the 0-freedom in order to avoid the expansion of non-free software: the non-linkable developer tools (by non-linkable I mean programs, as opposed libraries) such as IDEs, VCS, Installer Tools, Code Analyzers, etc.
My understanding of the GPL, which I believe to be shared by a large portion of the free software community, is that the license a tool to insure the /users/ freedoms by setting a frame of /minimal/ restrictions needed to insure the legal and technical feasibility to foster Free Software.
It was never the intent to /coerce/ anyone to using or writing free software. All it states is that /if/ you want to use our software, these are the /minimal/ fundamental rules.
Unfortunately the GPL has often been portrayed as tool for coercion, sometimes from within the "Open Source" community. And I have the (hopefully false) impression that this proposal roots in the idea of extending this alleged /coercion/ to developer tools.
I hope that from this perspective it becomes clear why this proposal does not display merit to many Free Software proponents.
Cheers, David Ayers