A suggestion for going forward from the RMS/FSF debate

[Ville Voutilainen]

On Sun, 18 Apr 2021 at 13:49, Richard Kenner <kenner@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu> wrote:
>
> > Depends on the use cases.  Not in military surveillance.  And certainly not
> > at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.  At Boeing could be the same, but
> > I'm not sure.  Before 2011, rather than building things from scratch,
> > washington bureaucrats simply picked from among existing technology.  But
> > things had really been going berserk around 2008.  From 2017 onwards,
> > I'm somewhat in the dark.  They could have started allowing some ownership
> > rights, but ownership rights under government contracts are very different
> > than ownership rights under commercial contracts.
>
> I can't understand your point with this version either.   Sorry.

I don't understand these ramblings either. LLNL sure seems to have
flirted with LLVM:
https://www.llnl.gov/news/nnsa-national-labs-team-nvidia-develop-open-source-fortran-compiler-technology
https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1608523
https://github.com/rose-compiler/rose/wiki/Install-ROSE-with-Clang-as-frontend