Brooks Davis wrote: > On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 05:04:21PM -0500, Eitan Adler wrote: >>> Smells like FUD to me. In all of my reading, I have never seen such a >>> claim. There may be some GPLv3 issues, but I seriously doubt this is >>> one. >> Which leads to my next question: why not upgrade? > > Given the number of FreeBSD using companies who are completely banned the > presence of GPLv3 source from their sites, improvements would have to > be extremely compelling and there would have to be a straight forward > way to produce snapshots of the src tree with out any GPLv3 components > as well as a simple way to build said source tree with a non-GPLv3 > compiler. Crazy idea perhaps, but can we make gcc 4.3 (as well as other GPLv3 components) an opt-in, just like we used to have crypto parts in the good old days when US was trying to limit export of this technology? Then can make both camps happy. Yes, it probably means that more efforts would be required to maintain it and keep code compatible with both versions, but since our current GPLv2 compiler is pretty much frozen it should not be much of the hassle as long as the initial work to support both versions have been done. -MaximReceived on Tue Jan 13 2009 - 22:08:30 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:40 UTC