[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Contributing LLVM.org patches to gud.el
From: |
Yann Hodique |
Subject: |
Re: Contributing LLVM.org patches to gud.el |
Date: |
Tue, 10 Feb 2015 07:42:50 -0800 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13001 (Ma Gnus v0.10) Emacs/24.4 (darwin) |
>>>>> "Helmut" == Helmut Eller <address@hidden> writes:
>> Tell them to dissolve their own community and
>> commit ritual suicide?
> Changing the license would hardly be suicide. Apple could still be the
> main contributor and they managed to survive even when they had to use
> GCC. It would piss off NVIDIA but it might attract some other
> individuals who don't like the idea that NVIDIA profits from their
> contributions. Either way, you don't make those decisions.
I find that claim (that a license change would annoy the NVIDIAs of the
world) very odd.
After all, the core of the entire issue, and this whole discussion, is
that the FSF did object to *technical possibilities* in order to counter
those same people, effectively deeming the GPL alone insufficient to
reach that goal. So now we cannot possibly be suggesting that slapping
a GPL sticker on LLVM could solve the "issue", can we?
I mean, one (at least...) of the following has to be true:
- the modularity of LLVM (GPL or not) allows access to the internals of
a compilation phase in a textual form, making it easy for people to
pipe a non-free component where they fancy
- the GPL is enough to push non-free components away (or is the best we
can do anyway), and we've been wasting time and opportunities
protecting something that doesn't exist
Bottom line, we cannot say that a GPL compiler (GCC) made modular would
have been a problem, but that a modular compiler (LLVM) made GPL would
be a solution. In the end, they'd be both modular and GPL, right?
Thanks,
Yann.
--
Speak the truth. That is always much easier,
and is often the most powerful argument.
-- Bene Gesserit Axiom
- Re: Contributing LLVM.org patches to gud.el, (continued)
- Re: Contributing LLVM.org patches to gud.el, Richard Stallman, 2015/02/11
- Re: Contributing LLVM.org patches to gud.el, Robin Templeton, 2015/02/09
- Re: Contributing LLVM.org patches to gud.el, Perry E. Metzger, 2015/02/09
- Re: Contributing LLVM.org patches to gud.el, Richard Stallman, 2015/02/09
- Re: Contributing LLVM.org patches to gud.el, Helmut Eller, 2015/02/10
- Re: Contributing LLVM.org patches to gud.el, David Kastrup, 2015/02/10
- Re: Contributing LLVM.org patches to gud.el, Helmut Eller, 2015/02/10
- Re: Contributing LLVM.org patches to gud.el, David Kastrup, 2015/02/10
- Re: Contributing LLVM.org patches to gud.el, Helmut Eller, 2015/02/10
- Re: Contributing LLVM.org patches to gud.el, David Kastrup, 2015/02/10
- Re: Contributing LLVM.org patches to gud.el,
Yann Hodique <=
- Re: Contributing LLVM.org patches to gud.el, David Kastrup, 2015/02/10
- Re: Contributing LLVM.org patches to gud.el, Richard Stallman, 2015/02/10
- Re: Contributing LLVM.org patches to gud.el, David Kastrup, 2015/02/11
- Re: Contributing LLVM.org patches to gud.el, Stefan Monnier, 2015/02/11
- Re: Contributing LLVM.org patches to gud.el, Richard Stallman, 2015/02/11
- Re: Contributing LLVM.org patches to gud.el, Florian Weimer, 2015/02/09
- Re: Contributing LLVM.org patches to gud.el, David Kastrup, 2015/02/09
- Re: Contributing LLVM.org patches to gud.el, Richard Stallman, 2015/02/10
- Re: Contributing LLVM.org patches to gud.el, David Kastrup, 2015/02/06
- Re: Contributing LLVM.org patches to gud.el, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2015/02/07