My friend you continue to impress! I just had a peek at your start on the mojoPortal installer, I'll respond more about it on that thread.
Yes, I'm still waiting for the Codeplex Team to complete the needed merge feature. Last I heard it got delayed because they had some other priorities that came up. They still say they wil have it working soon, but I don't know exactly what soon means, my guess is another 4-8 weeks. But there is no hurry from my point of view, I can continue to use the Novell Forge svn server indefinitely. Its not a requirement of Codeplex that you use their repository as long as you are making source code releases on Codeplex. Having a presence on Codeplex is very helpful as thats the go to place for .NET folks looking for open source code. You could host your ReleaseIt repository at Novell Forge or google code or sourceforge and still make it available on Codeplex.
Licensing pre-amble: I am not qualified to give any legal advice, anything I say here is a laymans understanding (or misunderstanding).
For your ReleaseIt project, actually I see no problem going with the GPL, in fact thats probably the best choice now that I think of it, but for the mojoPortal Installer it would pose potential risks and snags, that I would like to avoid by not using GPL.
The problem (and perhaps benefit) of GPL is its viral clause, which basically says if your app depends on GPL code your app must also be released under the GPL. Now if you own all the copyright for the code you can dual license under GPL and some other commercial license to customers. This is the business model of MySql and quite a few other open source projects. In order to contribute code to those projects contributers must transfer copyright of any contribution to the project, otherwise MySql would have no ability to use the code under their commercial license. So, users can use MySql free, but if you embed it in your app and want to release it under a commercial license you have to buy a commercial license from MySql to be able to include it in your app.
I chose not to use the GPL or this model in mojoPortal. Licensing under GPL would make it less attractive for others to easily build and sell applications based on mojoPortal because they would have to buy a commercial license from me. Some people would do that and perhaps I could have made some money that way but my goal is for more people to use mojoPortal so I don't want to scare people away with the GPL. I want them to be able to bundle apps that plug into mojoportal with mojoPortal and I want them to be able to license their app using any license they want. I just don't want them to be able to obscure the fact that mojoPortal is in the package. It has to be in the documentation or fine print saying that it includes mojoPortal and mojoPortal is licensed under the CPL. I "think" the CPL gives me this support because they can't sub-license mojoportal except under the same terms as the CPL, but it allows them to license applications they bundle with mojoPortal under any license because it doesn't have the linking clause of the GPL. You can have a dependency on CPL code without the having to license as CPL, but you can't take the core of mojoportal and derive a new work and change the license.
Because of the viral clause inthe GPL, I cannot use GPL code in mojoPortal. So for example I can't distribute a release of mojoPortal pre-configured for MySql because the MySql Connector for. NET is licensed under the GPL. Note that the terms of the GPL only cover distribution, not use, so I package a separate data layer for MySql which I license under GPL to comply with the connector dependency, but the end user has to install it on top of a mojoportal package already configured for something else. Actually, there is an exception clause attached to the MySql connector that does allow it to be packaged, but my analysis is that I'm safer not doing that. The GPL does allow distribution as mere aggregation, so I can for example package the MySql connector with the source code in a single download without falling prey to the viral clause. I think in the installer project if the user picks MySql we will need to prompt with a license agreement showing the GPL.
So, for the installer, while I think it might be ok for the installer to be GPL, I'd like to avoid it in case I'm wrong and err on the side of caution. A case could be made that mojoportal has a dependency on the installer and then the viral clause could bite me. I'd prefer to go with CPL but willing to go with even a more liberal license. CPL is not one of the listed choices on Codeplex, but if you ask them they can put any license you want. I had them put CPL there for me.
For the installer, I'd like to have the code in the same repository as mojoPortal.