Apple-employed maintainers (was Re: Apple, iPhone, and GPLv3 troubles)

2008-09-24 Thread Paolo Bonzini
Peter O'Gorman wrote: Yuhong Bao wrote: and Apple uses GCC (which is now under GPLv3) and Mac OS X on it. Unfortunately, the iPhone is incompatible with GPLv3, if you want more see the link I mentioned. Apple does not use a GPLv3 version of GCC. Ah, actually I think I now see the OP's

Re: Apple-employed maintainers (was Re: Apple, iPhone, and GPLv3 troubles)

2008-09-24 Thread Jack Howarth
On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 11:47:18AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: Peter O'Gorman wrote: Yuhong Bao wrote: and Apple uses GCC (which is now under GPLv3) and Mac OS X on it. Unfortunately, the iPhone is incompatible with GPLv3, if you want more see the link I mentioned. Apple does not use

Re: Apple-employed maintainers (was Re: Apple, iPhone, and GPLv3 troubles)

2008-09-24 Thread Paolo Bonzini
Well at least that explains their total inactivity in the last year. Is Dale the one still allowed to read the gcc-patches mailing list? No, that would be Stan just because he's not at Apple. It must be said also that Mike Stump accepted to review/discuss Darwin/ObjC patches that he was CCed

Re: Apple-employed maintainers (was Re: Apple, iPhone, and GPLv3 troubles)

2008-09-24 Thread Ian Lance Taylor
Paolo Bonzini [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Ah, actually I think I now see the OP's point. Apple is scared of the GPLv3 because the iPhone might violate it, so they are not contributing to anything that falls under the GPLv3. ... 1) does it make sense to keep a maintainer category that is

Re: Apple-employed maintainers (was Re: Apple, iPhone, and GPLv3 troubles)

2008-09-24 Thread Duncan Sands
However if GPLv3 is such a huge issue at Apple, it does make one wonder if llvm will ever see a gcc front-end newer than the current 4.2 one. The LLVM folks are writing a new frontend anyhow. In the future they presumably plan to stop using the gcc frontend. gcc's code is so

Runtime library license, was Re: Apple-employed maintainers (was Re: Apple, iPhone, and GPLv3 troubles)

2008-09-24 Thread Basile STARYNKEVITCH
Ian Lance Taylor wrote: Paolo Bonzini [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It's sad, but I think that there is need for the SC to take action on this. I personally don't think there is any need to remove them as maintainers until the FSF finally produces the GPLv3 version of the runtime library license.

Re: Runtime library license, was Re: Apple-employed maintainers (was Re: Apple, iPhone, and GPLv3 troubles)

2008-09-24 Thread Ian Lance Taylor
Basile STARYNKEVITCH [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Is it top secret information only available to some few members of the Steering Committee, or is some information sharable on this list? Just knowing that indeed a runtime library license will be finalized before Christmas (ie in 2008) and that

Re: Apple-employed maintainers (was Re: Apple, iPhone, and GPLv3 troubles)

2008-09-24 Thread Jack Howarth
On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 04:33:35PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: Well at least that explains their total inactivity in the last year. Is Dale the one still allowed to read the gcc-patches mailing list? No, that would be Stan just because he's not at Apple. It must be said also that Mike

Re: Runtime library license, was Re: Apple-employed maintainers (was Re: Apple, iPhone, and GPLv3 troubles)

2008-09-24 Thread NightStrike
On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 11:26 AM, Ian Lance Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Basile STARYNKEVITCH [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Is it top secret information only available to some few members of the Steering Committee, or is some information sharable on this list? Just knowing that indeed a

Re: Apple-employed maintainers (was Re: Apple, iPhone, and GPLv3 troubles)

2008-09-24 Thread Chris Lattner
On Sep 24, 2008, at 8:51 AM, Jack Howarth wrote: The SC knows of the issue Still, after six months it would be nice to have a clearer idea of what will happen with respect to Darwin/ObjC, especially since the previous statement (which I suppose was as clear as Mike could do) was buried

Re: Apple-employed maintainers (was Re: Apple, iPhone, and GPLv3 troubles)

2008-09-24 Thread Chris Lattner
On Sep 24, 2008, at 8:02 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: However if GPLv3 is such a huge issue at Apple, it does make one wonder if llvm will ever see a gcc front-end newer than the current 4.2 one. The LLVM folks are writing a new frontend anyhow. In the future they presumably plan to stop

Re: Runtime library license, was Re: Apple-employed maintainers (was Re: Apple, iPhone, and GPLv3 troubles)

2008-09-24 Thread Ian Lance Taylor
NightStrike [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: There is a simple technique which anybody is free to use to make this happen much faster: make a large donation to the SFLC and/or the FSF, contingent on this issue being finished. In the absence of that, it will happen in the time that people have

Re: Runtime library license, was Re: Apple-employed maintainers (was Re: Apple, iPhone, and GPLv3 troubles)

2008-09-24 Thread Basile STARYNKEVITCH
Ian Lance Taylor wrote: NightStrike [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: There is a simple technique which anybody is free to use to make this happen much faster: make a large donation to the SFLC and/or the FSF, contingent on this issue being finished. In the absence of that, it will happen in the time