[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: testing before a release

From: Bryce McKinlay
Subject: Re: testing before a release
Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2001 14:41:03 +1300
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.5) Gecko/20011012

Tom Tromey wrote:

I've always assumed that since libgcc has used this license for years
(probably more than 10 years), that it is well understood and
acceptable (for its purpose).  If it has problems, I think they should
be addressed through RMS and the gcc steering committee.  If this
license is unworkable for libgcj then it is a hundred times worse for
libgcc -- libgcc is required by every gcc-compiled program.

Its unfair to lump classpath/libgcj and libgcc together here. The libgcc license has and does seem to work well - for libgcc. This is a small compiler support library that makes little sense outside the scope of supporting object files compiled gcc. But classpath and libgcj are much larger and broader in scope than libgcc or even libstdc++.

The question is whether classpath/libgcj should be using the libgcc license or whether the classpath license should be clarified to prevent misinterpretation or misuse.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]