From harmony-dev-return-2759-apmail-incubator-harmony-dev-archive=incubator.apache.org@incubator.apache.org Sun Dec 04 16:14:53 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-harmony-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 88697 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2005 16:14:52 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 4 Dec 2005 16:14:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 51971 invoked by uid 500); 4 Dec 2005 16:14:48 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-harmony-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 51877 invoked by uid 500); 4 Dec 2005 16:14:47 -0000 Mailing-List: contact harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 51866 invoked by uid 99); 4 Dec 2005 16:14:47 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 04 Dec 2005 08:14:47 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (asf.osuosl.org: local policy) Received: from [167.206.4.202] (HELO mta7.srv.hcvlny.cv.net) (167.206.4.202) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 04 Dec 2005 08:14:46 -0800 Received: from [10.0.1.81] (ool-43560634.dyn.optonline.net [67.86.6.52]) by mta7.srv.hcvlny.cv.net (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-4.03 (built Sep 22 2005)) with ESMTP id <0IQZ00MDEEG1LV24@mta7.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> for harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org; Sun, 04 Dec 2005 11:14:25 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2005 11:14:23 -0500 From: "Geir Magnusson Jr." Subject: Re: ASF has been shipping GPL exception stuff for years and still is ;) In-reply-to: <20051204123107.GA18769@pogo.kaffe.org> To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org Message-id: <359D75A3-D4E1-42D4-9340-A0C10839700B@apache.org> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.746.2) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT References: <1133420625.3024.56.camel@localhost.localdomain> <438F2831.7090309@apache.org> <20051201184704.GA26688@pogo.kaffe.org> <1133532790.3063.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> <4390671A.4020100@apache.org> <20051203170137.GA8499@pogo.kaffe.org> <918FC0A2-3CD5-4CDA-A337-A416D6F655B6@apache.org> <20051203201625.GA17831@pogo.kaffe.org> <43921AC6.3080706@dedasys.com> <9B8BBD4C-9A10-40DA-A771-A590214ADC02@apache.org> <20051204123107.GA18769@pogo.kaffe.org> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N 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