Re: Progress on GCC plugins ?

[Basile STARYNKEVITCH <basile at starynkevitch dot net>]

Andrew Haley wrote:
>  > 
>  > But as you know, most gcc ports are never contributed anyhow.
>
> Sure, but they are still free software: if the compiler gets
> distributed, so does its source code.  Of couse, assigning copyright
> to FSF is nice, but freedom is much more important.

Oh I fully understand that now. So most GCC ports are GPL-ed but outside 
FSF source tree. Hence, a plugin machinery (including for backends) 
would make this easier!

I also expressed (orally) the concern (at previous GCC summit, Ottawa 
july 2007) that getting the copyright assignment signed is a lot of work 
in some organizations and I would hope that the FSF might consider 
making it easier (I don't know exactly how, as a non lawyer I would 
dream of simple GPLed contributions, with the copyright owner giving the 
FSF the right to sue on its behalf, ...) but apparently it is not a 
concern.

I still believe that GCC needs more developers, and attracting them 
could be a concern.


--
Basile STARYNKEVITCH         http://starynkevitch.net/Basile/
email: basile<at>starynkevitch<dot>net mobile: +33 6 8501 2359
8, rue de la Faiencerie, 92340 Bourg La Reine, France
*** opinions {are only mines, sont seulement les miennes} ***