This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Meta-Level Compilation project / Introspector/ AST access /Licensing question
- From: Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin dot org>
- To: mike stump <mrs at windriver dot com>
- Cc: mdupont777 at yahoo dot com, <Joe dot Buck at synopsys dot com>, <dewar at gnat dot com>,<gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2002 00:45:31 -0400 (EDT)
- Subject: Re: Meta-Level Compilation project / Introspector/ AST access /Licensing question
On Fri, 21 Jun 2002, mike stump wrote:
> These discussions are off topic for this list. gnu.misc.discuss was
> created soley for this purpose. That is was and remains the right
> forum.
Actually, for his questions, it is not.
In fact, it's probably the last place he should look. Relying on usenet
for legal advice is, IMHO, a worse idea than representing yourself in
court.
But I agree that this mailing list is not the place for this stuff.
I apologize for answering back to the list.
If he wants answers he can rely on (IE blame someone else if they are
wrong), at the very least he needs to talk to a lawyer.
Instead, he continues to ask legal questions on a mailing list about
compiler development, trying to pretend that they are really compiler
questions.
James, Asking people to show you what law you'd be violating or why
one thing is legal, and another somewhat similar thing is not, is not a
gcc topic. If you want to know how to go about interpreting the law, go
to law school.
What is and what is not legal to do with gcc, is not related to
development of gcc itself.
Period.
Asking questions that are deep in the mushiest part of law besides
real property law on a compiler list is not going to get you answers.
--Dan