[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Interesting discussion on gcc about objc

From: Nicola Pero
Subject: Re: Interesting discussion on gcc about objc
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2010 20:44:47 +0200 (CEST)

>> GNU ObjC has so few users that it seems hardly worth the effort to upgrade 
>> the
>> GNU ObjC front end to ObjC 2.0. And there are other issues:
> Translation: The GNU project doesn't care about GNUstep.

The GNU project is a lot of people.  One person on the GCC mailing list wasn't 
interested in Objective-C support.  Many others were and are.  I am. ;-)

> We already have an MIT-licensed runtime in svn that implements the ObjC 2 
> runtime 
> features and works with GNUstep, so this isn't a problem.

"libobjc2" is a derivative work of libobjc which is an FSF GNU GPL v2+ piece of 
so I'm not sure why you say it's a MIT-licensed runtime.  If you wanted a 
runtime you should have started from scratch instead of scavenging the old FSF 

I'm actually quite confused as to why you worked on "libobjc2" now: I thought 
you were working 
on libobjc because you meant to contribute changes back to the official FSF GNU 
but you never have, and now claim your libobjc derivative is independent and no 
longer GNU GPL v2+, 
which I'm confused about (I guess as I'm not a lawyer) but puts your runtime 
(in my view) 
in a legal limbo to say the least.

I'm not a lawyer though.

Anyway, I have nothing against "libobjc2" per se (except that you need to sort 
out your license)
as I think GNUstep should support as many free Objective-C compilers and 
runtimes as possible.
I think we all hope that there are, and will be, may free Objective-C compilers 
and runtimes
to choose from. :-)

I personally do want to use the FSF GCC and runtime library, but that's because 
one of the very
few organizations I trust is the FSF.  I don't trust Apple. ;-)


reply via email to

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