> Sir, perhaps you could explain something that has puzzled me for
> sometime. Why is MySQL, which requires that any developer contributing
> to the project assign their copyrights to a private corporation
> considered by the Free Software Foundation to be an exemplary open
> source project,

If you want to know more about this, you can easily find tons of
promotional material on both mysql.com and fsf.org ;-)
For a more detailed discussion of incompatibilities and relative
merits of GPL, MPL and BSD, see
http://www.mozilla.org/MPL/relicensing-faq.html#why-relicensing
http://www.mozilla.org/MPL/relicensing-faq.html#why-not-mit
http://www.tomhull.com/ocston/docs/mozgpl.html

> while Firebird, which asks no more than that it's code
> be available to all comers subject only to a requirement to publish
> changes that are themselves distributed is a pariah?

Sadly, that is not true. Firebird does ask more.
For example, any site that displays Firebird "gloat" logo as described in
http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php?op=ffoundation&id=gloat_logos
is in violation of Amendment II.1 of Interbase Public License,
as well as, arguably, some parts of firebirdsql.org itself.
Borland is not, for now, pursuing such violations, but nothing
prevents it from doing so in the future.
Firebird project decided to drop the advertisement clause when
mirgating to IDPL, and I think that was a wise decision.

> I can understand the personal mental pathology of a single individual, but otherwise
> rational people follow his ravings is utterly beyond me.

Ah, don't you see that this argument can be applied both ways,
depending on whom you choose to designate as "single individual"?
Sorry, no offence meant, of course. ;-)