Benjamin Kosnik wrote: >> As previously stated, if there is contrary information from FSF lawyers, >> then please gather it and present it to the FSF. > > Please specify exactly what you want, and who at the FSF I talk to.
I don't want anything in particular. I can assure you that my idea of a good time is not to spend hours drafting and redrafting emails about license issues. I volunteered to do that because RMS asked someone on the SC to do it, and nobody else volunteered. You will have to ask the FSF what they need to confirm the situation as you understand it. I would imagine that the ideal piece of evidence would be email from the FSF saying "It's OK to consider the STL files as part of GCC, you can modify them as you see fit, and it's OK to put FSF copyright notices on them." The right person to contact is RMS directly: [EMAIL PROTECTED] He generally responds to email within forty-eight hours, as the outside. I would suggest copying the GCC SC, since as the SC is the official maintainer of GCC, the SC needs to understand the outcome. -- Mark Mitchell CodeSourcery [EMAIL PROTECTED] (650) 331-3385 x713
