This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Apple-employed maintainers (was Re: Apple, iPhone, and GPLv3 troubles)


Peter O'Gorman wrote:
> Yuhong Bao wrote:
>> and Apple uses GCC (which is now under GPLv3) and Mac OS X on it.
>> Unfortunately, the iPhone is incompatible with GPLv3, if you want more see
>> the link I mentioned.
> 
> Apple does not use a GPLv3 version of GCC.

Ah, actually I think I now see the OP's point.  Apple is scared of the
GPLv3 because the iPhone might violate it, so they are not contributing
to anything that falls under the GPLv3.

It is indeed in-topic.  There are four Darwin maintainers listed in
MAINTAINERS:

darwin port             Dale Johannesen         dalej@apple.com
darwin port             Mike Stump              mrs@apple.com
darwin port             Eric Christopher        echristo@apple.com
darwin port             Stan Shebs              stanshebs@earthlink.net

and three of them are not allowed to read the GCC patches mailing list.
   They might do something if CCed, but not necessarily so.  Same for
Objective-C/C++:

objective-c/c++         Mike Stump              mrs@apple.com
objective-c/c++         Stan Shebs              stanshebs@earthlink.net


Now I wonder:

1) does it make sense to keep a maintainer category that is known to be
inactive?

2) who should then get maintainership of darwin?  note that there are
some patches for darwin like this one:
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gcc.patches/172498

It's sad, but I think that there is need for the SC to take action on this.

Paolo


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]