trampolines handling, important copyright question

[Marc Espie <espie at nerim dot net>]

So, I used to contribute back to gcc regularly, got overwhelmed by
other stuff, but I'm back.

Case in point: I've added stuff to OpenBSD for secure handling of trampolines.
Since trampolines require an executable stack, we want to make sure we don't
have trampolines all over the place, hence a -ftrampolines options, and a
-Wtrampolines option.

Those are very straightforward, and they're a no-brainer for security-conscious
people.

The issue at hand is not technical, it's an issue with the licence.

Frankly put, the developers of OpenBSD don't like the GPLv3. We're totally
uncertain what's going whenever lawsuits against it happen, and so we don't
want to use it (please don't start a flamewar on this one, this is not the
subject, and you're totally unlikely to change our opinion).

So, how do I deal with my code ?
I have a patch for trampolines, which currently belongs to me. It can be
integrated into gcc 4.2.1, and thus released as GPLv2+, with which I have
little problem.

However, if I submit it, per-the-rules, against gcc-current, for it to be
integrated, I need to waive my rights (I have a (c) assignment already on
record at the FSF, so a priori, I don't need more paperwork).

If I recall correctly, it means I transfer all possible rights to the FSF.
I no longer own my patch.

Then it gets released as part of gcc-current, under the GPLv3.

If I get things correctly *I can no longer release it under GPLv2+*, as we
do for our mutant fork of gcc 4.2.1.

Is there something I'm missing ? Is there a way I can still be the owner
of that patch and release it as I wish ?

Otherwise, this is a big problem.

I took the trampoline work as an example of a very small change with very
little impact, but some people in OpenBSD are working on other contributions
to gcc. For instance, we used to have -fstack-protector working on alpha
with gcc 3.3, and it's very likely Miod/Etoh are going to step in and look
at adapting it for gcc 4.2.1.

It's very much preferable for outside people if we can keep contributing
to the gcc project, but if it means we can no longer have access to our own
patches, well, I'm prepared to maintain a set of patches to the official gcc
distribution, released under our own ownership, and licensable under GPLv3...