Re: Contributing LLVM.org patches to gud.el

["Perry E. Metzger" <perry@piermont.com>]

On Mon, 09 Feb 2015 11:15:20 -0500 Robin Templeton <robin@terpri.org>
wrote:
> Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:
> > By replacing most of GCC with non-copylefted code, they would have
> > gone most of the way towards achieving the same result: to make
> > GCC cease to be a reason for all sorts of companies to work on a
> > compiler that always gives users freedom.  Because GCC would have
> > come much closer to failing to always give users freedom.
> 
> That would not have happened under the original proposal, which
> included assigning the LLVM copyright to the FSF:
> 
> "If people are seriously in favor of LLVM being a long-term part of
> GCC, I personally believe that the LLVM community would agree to
> assign the copyright of LLVM itself to the FSF and we can work
> through these details."

Indeed. I think it is important that people understand that the
motivation of the academics (not Apple) who started the LLVM project
was to make it easier to work on language processing tools, JITs and
the like. Their goal was not to make proprietary software, it was to
get their work done. I concur that at one time the LLVM crowd
largely would have welcomed merging their work into GCC. That time
has, of course, passed.

Perry
-- 
Perry E. Metzger		perry@piermont.com