This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: gcj -v --help: ecj switches
Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> Ping!
>
> * Ralf Wildenhues wrote on Sun, Mar 01, 2009 at 08:20:35AM CET:
>> I have a patch (accompanying those other ones on gcc-paches) to fix
>>
>> --- a/gcc/java/lang.opt
>> +++ b/gcc/java/lang.opt
>> @@ -209,212 +209,213 @@ Java
>>
>> ;
>> ; Warnings handled by ecj.
>> -; FIXME: document them
>> ;
>>
>>
>> but I did start off with the help texts from
>> <http://help.eclipse.org/stable/index.jsp?topic=/org.eclipse.jdt.doc.isv/guide/jdt_api_compile.htm>
>> which AFAICS falls under the Eclipse Public License - v 1.0
>> <http://www.eclipse.org/legal/epl-v10.html>.
>>
>> Now my question, before I blindly post this to {gcc,java}-patches and
>> thus create potential legal hassles for whoever works on it: was it
>> OKed (by the SC or FSF) to integrate such material into GCC?
No.
>> If not, would you think that it suffices if I reformulate the entries
>> sufficiently, or do we need to start playing the legal game, if the
>> situation is to be improved?
All material in gcc must be assigned the the FSF by the copyright owner.
A rewrite that didn't derive from the Eclipse work would be OK.
I don't think that the constitution of the Eclipse foundation allows
transfer of copyright to the FSF. IANAL, etc...
Andrew.