Richard Kenner kenner@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu
Mon Jul 16 15:24:00 GMT 2007

> It is source, covered by the copyright assignment.  The assignment, if I
> recall correctly, says that the FSF will distribute the source under license.

Yes, but doesn't say *which one*: that's the whole point here!  All it
gives are very general terms that the license must follow.  That's what
I've been calling the "mini-GPL".

> I was talking about patches -- copyrightable creative works which may
> be assigned and licensed.  You appear to be talking about something else.

No, I'm trying to separate the two parts of a patch, the fact that it's a
derived work from the file being patched and the creative component of the
patch, by discussing each individually because I believe that different
licensing issues apply to each.

More information about the Gcc mailing list