This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: RFH: GPLv3
- From: David Gressett <jdgressett at amli-denton dot com>
- To: GCC <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 12:29:06 -0500
- Subject: Re: RFH: GPLv3
$.02 from a user who has been following the discussion:
1. Don't jack with the version numbers. This is confusing.
2. Turn off public access to the code while changing license text in the
3. Backports to current stuff should stay under current licence, i.e. a
gcc 4.2.1 containing bits and pieces of 4.3 should stay under GPLv2
until 4.3 is released. If a 4.2.2 comes out after the release of 4.3, it
should go to GPLv3. I.e, all open branches should change licenses at once.
4. gcc should put a short reference to the license in the version
string. My MingGW version of gcc describes itself as
"gcc version 3.4.5 (mingw special)" A future MinGW version should do
something like "gcc version 4.3.0 (mingw special) GPLv3". Every vendor
who distributes a tweaked gcc should be requested to to implement this ASAP.
5. It probably wouldn't hurt to have a command-line option to describe
the license(s) in more detail. This would be especially useful when
using compilers from vendors like AdaCore who have products like GNAT
GPL which has a run-time library that is governed by GPL rather than LGPL.
6. gcc isn't the only software product that will be affected by
confusion about the license. gcc should provide a small license-display
library that users can use in their own products. This would be easy
enough for any user to implement, but if it comes with gcc, it would be
more likely to be widely used.