From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Contributing LLVM.org patches to gud.el Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2015 10:31:47 +0100 Message-ID: <87sieeru2k.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> References: <87mw4rxkzv.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <874mqvf4dj.fsf@panthera.terpri.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1423560728 15224 80.91.229.3 (10 Feb 2015 09:32:08 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2015 09:32:08 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Helmut Eller Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Feb 10 10:31:58 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1YL7Ah-0004z0-Nc for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2015 10:31:56 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38670 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YL7Ah-0006OS-8E for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2015 04:31:55 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:35322) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YL7Ab-0006K5-8g for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2015 04:31:53 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YL7AZ-0001Yv-VC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2015 04:31:49 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:51293) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YL7AZ-0001Yn-TF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2015 04:31:47 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58468 helo=lola) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YL7AZ-0006mM-Ej; Tue, 10 Feb 2015 04:31:47 -0500 Original-Received: by lola (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 0AEA7E0514; Tue, 10 Feb 2015 10:31:47 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: (Helmut Eller's message of "Tue, 10 Feb 2015 09:24:59 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:182793 Archived-At: Helmut Eller writes: > On Mon, Feb 09 2015, Richard Stallman wrote: > >> If I had seen it back then, I would not have had the benefit of >> hindsight, but it would clearly have been a real possibility. Nothing >> would have ruled it out. > > Has somebody asked Chris Lattner, who seems to the leader on the LLVM > project, if they are willing to change the license now to simplify > coexistence with the GCC project? Sorry, but that's rubbish. LLVM is licensed under the UI/NCSAOSL license which is compatible with all versions of the GPL. Everybody has the freedom to take the code and incorporate it into a GPL-licensed work. You can take whatever LLVM code you want and integrate it into GCC while licensing your changes under any GPL version. There is absolutely nothing the LLVM team could do more other than assigning all of their copyrights to the FSF in order to hand over licensing and development control. And seeing how GCC fares with that regarding extensibility, I would not exactly blame them when they are not interested in that. But I'd be surprised if such a ridiculous idea had even crossed their mind. At any rate, I seem to remember that somebody else mentioned in this thread Apple having offered to contribute their Clang/Dragonegg work to GCC proper and getting rejected. So it seems that this option even was on the table at one point of time in history. > His answer would be more interesting than speculations about Apple's > intentions. If you are interested in seeing how people react to ridiculous requests, maybe. This is at the current point of time entirely our problem. If we wanted to start a GPLed fork or variant of LLVM, we would be free to do so. -- David Kastrup