From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-163072-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 21717 invoked by alias); 1 Jul 2010 11:57:12 -0000
Received: (qmail 21708 invoked by uid 22791); 1 Jul 2010 11:57:11 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.2 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_40,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from VLSI1.ULTRA.NYU.EDU (HELO vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu) (128.122.140.213)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with SMTP; Thu, 01 Jul 2010 11:57:07 +0000
Received: by vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu (4.1/1.34)	id AA03151; Thu, 1 Jul 10 07:58:00 EDT
From: kenner@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu (Richard Kenner)
Message-Id: <11007011158.AA03151@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu>
Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2010 11:57:00 -0000
To: mark@codesourcery.com
Subject: Re: Patch pinging
Cc: burnus@net-b.de, corbet@lwn.net, dje.gcc@gmail.com, gcc@gcc.gnu.org,        gerald@pfeifer.com, iant@google.com, ja_walker@sbcglobal.net,        lopezibanez@gmail.com, nightstrike@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <4C2C2605.60904@codesourcery.com>
References: <AANLkTimRPovANTXmj2WHsTjpWyZRjq05M0igERMkMIMY@mail.gmail.com>    <4C0D9979.90603@sbcglobal.net>    <alpine.LSU.1.99.1006271105190.9343@acrux.dbai.tuwien.ac.at>    <4C271A9B.4030503@net-b.de>    <AANLkTiljXmtKvtFjb5rxnvvAN5DDtK7JgqjTHuPur8oL@mail.gmail.com>    <AANLkTinhMTnZdnO_aS2EPWoCnonZCBMqtZCarxNWRzhn@mail.gmail.com>    <AANLkTikqUzEfSQi37raUwIGsnohNL_RPMEvfXRZPd5iq@mail.gmail.com>    <AANLkTilDM5ZJuq-hEIMIbBWZ1U8IpZpM1AyyF65TfD_N@mail.gmail.com>    <AANLkTin9IfPdPhIvPi2adhu957UvO4Yk0_lTgPpuw5VR@mail.gmail.com>    <AANLkTimbBchrH_DeoTd3osBWe7DRcc8uvZbiGDfUBgHd@mail.gmail.com>    <mcrvd92917e.fsf@google.com> <mcrlj9yxspk.fsf@google.com>    <11006291124.AA07060@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu>    <AANLkTintW2HfGV45ZK8LyWRas9EOWUMvklsQi5CIeI-I@mail.gmail.com>    <mcrfx05x669.fsf@google.com>    <AANLkTikT_9irn-7l0kKlfiafbN2OcP2CDHCMLjXwQrRD@mail.gmail.com>    <mcrtyolvln4.fsf@google.com> <20100629163525.6e12f940@bike.lwn.net>    <mcrocettmq9.fsf@google.com> <4C2C2605.60904@codesourcery.com>
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/>
Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2010-07/txt/msg00007.txt.bz2

> I do understand the rationale for the FSF's desire to hold copyright,
> and have a paper trail.  But, at this point, I think that's making it
> harder to people to participate, and with no real benefit.  The FSF is
> clinging to an outmoded policy due to a single occurrence from long ago.

I disagree.  From what I see of the industry and its practices, I think the
risk of an attack on Free Software due to lack of providence issues is
INCREASING, not decreasing.  As FLOSS software makes more and more inroads
into the commercial world, proprietary software companies will feel more
and more threatened and the way most companies react to threats nowadays is
via legal attacks.  We've had companies (e.g., SCO) in the past who
transitioned from being software companies to legal firms.  It would not
surprise me at all if one or more compiler companies did something similar
in the next decade.