> Op Fri, 4 Aug 2006, schreef Marco van de Voort: > > > > Or, in case of fpc - build those specific applications with it, which > > > are not common enough for a community to write. > > > > I prefer I could tell some vendor "implement this embedded architecture", > > and if you > > submit this back then I grant you a commercial license to integrate the > > compiler into your IDE, without open sourcing the IDE, and for that purpose > > alone. (more or less the GNU mechanism) > > You can do this. Of course, you need agreement within the FPC team, but > there is no reason why we would need a GNU like copyright assignment > procedure for that.
We had this discussion before. I'll provide a summary for the rest: - Since you don't have a systematic policy to point at, it is pretty hard to make a case that you (the ones that say YES) really are all principal contributors. - Non-principal contributors are a problem. What is a contribution, what a trivial fix? And again, how is your registration of this? - Now, if GNU foundation says yes, they can go ahead. I don't know the size of the GNU board, but the decision making process could only involve a few people. The compiler at least has 15-20 contributors, the RTL/FCL and probably vastly more. _______________________________________________ fpc-devel maillist - [email protected] http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
