On Jul 13, 2007, Joel Sherrill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > OTOH there are a number of non-FSF entities that > have committed morally and/or legally to providing > long-term support for gcc directly and/or OSes that ship > with a gcc. I really believe these people need guidance > from the FSF on what to do.
Long-term support shouldn't be a problem; you can keep on supporting it under GPLv3. Now, if someone committed to offering support under one particular version of the GPL, even though GCC has always been released under GPLv#+, and GPLv3 has been in the radar for at least 2 years now, this may have been an unfortunate commitment. I suppose the FSF might be willing to help, even though AFAICT it's under no obligation to do so. I suggest getting in touch with [EMAIL PROTECTED] if/when you need guidance. As for permission to use a patch under GPLv2, I can't tell whether it would be easier to get permission for use under GPLv2 from the original contributor or from the FSF. I suppose it would depend on the contributor. I shall point out that I don't speak for the FSF, and I don't even speak for FSFLA in this or even in most matters. -- Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/ FSF Latin America Board Member http://www.fsfla.org/ Red Hat Compiler Engineer [EMAIL PROTECTED], gcc.gnu.org} Free Software Evangelist [EMAIL PROTECTED], gnu.org}
