I don't want to get too involved in the bcw driver debate. I just wish this wouldn't have happened as I was personally looking forward to a BSD implementation for broadcom chipsets.
http://undeadly.org/cgi?action=article&sid=20070406104008&thres=(u+*+100)+/+c+%3E=+75
Had this happened to us, I would have hoped for a private contact from the GPL code owner. I also would have wanted to release this information myself through the project website instead of what actually transpired. The OpenBSD project has a stronger view on GPL that we do. I suspect this was part of the reason the reaction has been so strong on both sides. I feel bad for the OpenBSD developer.
I might as well take the opportunity to clarify our position on licensing. In short, BSD code is preferred. We hope to maintain the kernel + userland with BSD licensed code. Obviously, using GNUstep we have a great deal of LGPL and GPL 2 code in the X11/GUI portions of our system. We are trying to keep that code as default installed ports to keep it isolated as much as possible. At one time I greatly disliked the GPL, but now I've realized there are some cases it makes sense.
Our stance on BSD only code in certain portions of the system must be so in order to share code between our project and the many BSD projects. We could start using GPL code, but then we would become an island with no other land masses to swim to.