harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Davanum Srinivas <dava...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: ASF has been shipping GPL exception stuff for years and still is ;)
Date Sun, 04 Dec 2005 16:59:34 GMT
I agree with Geir.

On 12/4/05, Geir Magnusson Jr. <geirm@apache.org> wrote:
>
> On Dec 4, 2005, at 7:31 AM, Dalibor Topic wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Dec 03, 2005 at 06:33:13PM -0500, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> >> On Dec 3, 2005, at 5:23 PM, David N. Welton wrote:
> >>
> >>> Perhaps the difference is that with the bits and pieces of gcc that
> >>> you
> >>> get, you don't even realize that you have them, which is different
> >>> from
> >>> noting that you have several .jar files floating around in your
> >>> download that aren't under the same terms as the rest of the code.
> >>>
> >>
> >> I think a different way to say it, one that is clearer for my
> >> thinking, is that there is no dependence in the code, or on having to
> >> use GCC - a user can take the source and recompile with some other
> >> compiler to get working software.
> >>
> >
> > Sure, but the ASF has chosen to ship software using GPL+linking
> > exception
> > licensed code, and has beeing doing so for years, as I have shown,
> > without any
> > negative results. The ASF has a choice not to ship the binaries, or to
> > ship them built with a different compiler, or to write their own
> > compiler,
> > but it chose not to, because obviously GPL+linking exception is
> > good enough
> > for what the ASF (and any $PROPRIETARY_SOFTWARE_VENDOR using gcc)
> > does, or
> > it would not be doing it.
> >
> > So, could the board please ratify the existing, and well-working
> > practice of
> > the ASF shipping code using GPL+linking exception licensed code as
> > obviosly, trivially OK? That should not be too hard to get done
> > quickly.
> > Pragmatism over ideology, and all that. That's why we are here, right?
>
> Let me start by noting (hopefully unnecessarily at this point) that
> I'm very interested in solving the licensing issues.
>
> That said, I think that to be fair, we need to distinguish between
> "using" in the sense of what GCC is doing  - a tool outside the scope
> of effort of the project enabling some behavior in a standard and non-
> intrusive way (just like we don't care about the license of the OS we
> run on), and "using" in the sense of developers of a project making a
> conscious decision to design and implement software with a dependency.
>
> geir
>
> --
> Geir Magnusson Jr                                  +1-203-665-6437
> geirm@apache.org
>
>
>


--
Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/blogs/

Mime
View raw message