* Re: Name of front-end
[not found] <1070947232.17483.ezmlm@gcc.gnu.org>
@ 2003-12-09 14:26 ` Victor Maurice Faubert
2003-12-09 15:37 ` Robert Dewar
0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread
From: Victor Maurice Faubert @ 2003-12-09 14:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc
At 05:20 +0000 2003.12.09, gcc-digest-help@gcc.gnu.org wrote:
>From: Daniel Berlin <dberlin@dberlin.org>
>Subject: Re: Name of front-end
>Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 18:59:36 -0500
>To: Robert Dewar <dewar@gnat.com>
>
>
>On Dec 8, 2003, at 6:31 PM, Robert Dewar wrote:
>
>>Andrew Haley wrote:
>>
>>>Robert Dewar writes:
>>> > If you google on PL/I you will find zillions of references from third
>>> > parties with no hint of a trademark, so I think you can safetly talk
>>> > about GNU PL/1 without worrying!
>>>Trademark law is complex, I strongly advise against anyone giving
>>>amateur legal opinions in this area :-)
>>
>>Umm, I don't think you need a lawyer to tell you that it a name is
>>not trademarked, then using it will not be a trademark infringement :-)
>
>Remember, just because it's not a *registered* trademark, doesn't
>make it not a trademark. You simply have to use it in trade for it
>to be a trademark. Though of course, registration gives you
>benefits. In the US, anyway.
>http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/tac/doc/basic/register.htm
>
>(The PTO, BTW, has the most worthless website on the planet. They
>made it look nicer recently, but didn't make any information easier
>to access. Zen and the art of redesigning government websites, i
>guess).
I'm not a lawyer, but I'd point out that an ANSI standard for PL/I exists
(ANSI X3.53-1976) and that non-IBM compilers for the language exist(ed),
e.g., VAX. IBM contributed to the ANSI standard which, from a quick
skimming of its introductory text, contains no information that the name
is trademarked or is used with IBM's approval. That prior practice would
indicate that PL/I is in the public domain as the name of programming
language.
--
Vic
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: Name of front-end
2003-12-09 14:26 ` Name of front-end Victor Maurice Faubert
@ 2003-12-09 15:37 ` Robert Dewar
0 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Robert Dewar @ 2003-12-09 15:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Victor Maurice Faubert; +Cc: gcc
> I'm not a lawyer, but I'd point out that an ANSI standard for PL/I exists
> (ANSI X3.53-1976) and that non-IBM compilers for the language exist(ed),
> e.g., VAX. IBM contributed to the ANSI standard which, from a quick
> skimming of its introductory text, contains no information that the name
> is trademarked or is used with IBM's approval. That prior practice would
> indicate that PL/I is in the public domain as the name of programming
> language.
Exactly ...
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: Name of front-end
2003-12-08 23:51 ` Laurent GUERBY
@ 2003-12-09 1:32 ` Robert Dewar
0 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Robert Dewar @ 2003-12-09 1:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Laurent GUERBY; +Cc: Andrew Haley, Richard Kenner, pkoning, gcc
Laurent GUERBY wrote:
> On Tue, 2003-12-09 at 00:31, Robert Dewar wrote:
>
>>Umm, I don't think you need a lawyer to tell you that it a name is
>>not trademarked, then using it will not be a trademark infringement :-)
>
>
> Sure, ask the MobiliX folks. MobiliX is not trademarked, Asterix
> and Obelix are, since the words are "close enough" German courts
> ruled that they were violating the existing trademarks.
Indeed the german courts are rather notorious here. My comments are
strictly with respect to US case law :-)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: Name of front-end
2003-12-08 23:44 ` Robert Dewar
2003-12-08 23:51 ` Laurent GUERBY
@ 2003-12-09 0:00 ` Daniel Berlin
1 sibling, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Berlin @ 2003-12-09 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Robert Dewar; +Cc: gcc, pkoning, Richard Kenner, Andrew Haley
On Dec 8, 2003, at 6:31 PM, Robert Dewar wrote:
> Andrew Haley wrote:
>
>> Robert Dewar writes:
>> > If you google on PL/I you will find zillions of references from
>> third
>> > parties with no hint of a trademark, so I think you can safetly
>> talk
>> > about GNU PL/1 without worrying!
>> Trademark law is complex, I strongly advise against anyone giving
>> amateur legal opinions in this area :-)
>
> Umm, I don't think you need a lawyer to tell you that it a name is
> not trademarked, then using it will not be a trademark infringement :-)
Remember, just because it's not a *registered* trademark, doesn't make
it not a trademark. You simply have to use it in trade for it to be a
trademark. Though of course, registration gives you benefits. In the
US, anyway.
http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/tac/doc/basic/register.htm
(The PTO, BTW, has the most worthless website on the planet. They made
it look nicer recently, but didn't make any information easier to
access. Zen and the art of redesigning government websites, i guess).
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: Name of front-end
2003-12-08 23:44 ` Robert Dewar
@ 2003-12-08 23:51 ` Laurent GUERBY
2003-12-09 1:32 ` Robert Dewar
2003-12-09 0:00 ` Daniel Berlin
1 sibling, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread
From: Laurent GUERBY @ 2003-12-08 23:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Robert Dewar; +Cc: Andrew Haley, Richard Kenner, pkoning, gcc
On Tue, 2003-12-09 at 00:31, Robert Dewar wrote:
> Umm, I don't think you need a lawyer to tell you that it a name is
> not trademarked, then using it will not be a trademark infringement :-)
Sure, ask the MobiliX folks. MobiliX is not trademarked, Asterix
and Obelix are, since the words are "close enough" German courts
ruled that they were violating the existing trademarks.
Now you've just expanded the "name is not trademarked" by
"name is not close enough from existing trademark following existing
rulings in various countries", and you need a lawyer
to do the search. (MobiliX is trying to get the ruling
reversed in various ways, estimated legal cost is around 60 000 USD).
Unfortunate state of affair.
Laurent
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: Name of front-end
2003-12-08 17:40 ` Andrew Haley
@ 2003-12-08 23:44 ` Robert Dewar
2003-12-08 23:51 ` Laurent GUERBY
2003-12-09 0:00 ` Daniel Berlin
0 siblings, 2 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Robert Dewar @ 2003-12-08 23:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Haley; +Cc: Richard Kenner, pkoning, gcc
Andrew Haley wrote:
> Robert Dewar writes:
>
> > If you google on PL/I you will find zillions of references from third
> > parties with no hint of a trademark, so I think you can safetly talk
> > about GNU PL/1 without worrying!
>
> Trademark law is complex, I strongly advise against anyone giving
> amateur legal opinions in this area :-)
Umm, I don't think you need a lawyer to tell you that it a name is
not trademarked, then using it will not be a trademark infringement :-)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: Name of front-end
[not found] ` <dalej@apple.com>
@ 2003-12-08 19:15 ` Felix Lee
0 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Felix Lee @ 2003-12-08 19:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc
search at www.uspto.gov doesn't turn up any current or historical
trademarks for "pl/1" or "pl/i" or "pl/2" by IBM. not sure the
limitations of that database, but it does include dead trademarks
earlier than 1960.
--
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: Name of front-end
2003-12-08 16:55 Richard Kenner
2003-12-08 17:03 ` Robert Dewar
@ 2003-12-08 18:37 ` Dale Johannesen
[not found] ` <dalej@apple.com>
1 sibling, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread
From: Dale Johannesen @ 2003-12-08 18:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Richard Kenner; +Cc: gcc, pkoning, Dale Johannesen
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 546 bytes --]
On Dec 8, 2003, at 8:32 AM, Richard Kenner wrote:
> FWIW, some IBM 360 PL/1 manuals I just looked at do not mark or
> claim
> "PL/1" as trademark.
>
> But certainly some did. And contemporary lore was that they
> trademarked PL/2,
> PL/3, etc ...
I've heard this also, but it may well be a myth. Here
http://www-3.ibm.com/software/data/ims/v5pdf/DFSI10C6.PDF.
is an IBM manual, which talks about PL/I and contains a list of IBM
trademarks (p. 13 according to Acrobat, or xi according to the
document),
and PL/I is not one of them.
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/enriched, Size: 710 bytes --]
On Dec 8, 2003, at 8:32 AM, Richard Kenner wrote:
<excerpt> FWIW, some IBM 360 PL/1 manuals I just looked at do not
mark or claim
"PL/1" as trademark.
But certainly some did. And contemporary lore was that they
trademarked PL/2,
PL/3, etc ...
</excerpt>
I've heard this also, but it may well be a myth. Here
<fontfamily><param>Arial</param><color><param>0000,0000,FFFF</param><x-tad-bigger>http://www-3.ibm.com/software/data/ims/v5pdf/DFSI10C6.PDF</x-tad-bigger></color><x-tad-bigger>.
</x-tad-bigger></fontfamily>is an IBM manual, which talks about PL/I
and contains a list of IBM
trademarks (p. 13 according to Acrobat, or xi according to the
document),
and PL/I is not one of them.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: Name of front-end
2003-12-08 17:03 ` Robert Dewar
@ 2003-12-08 17:40 ` Andrew Haley
2003-12-08 23:44 ` Robert Dewar
0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Haley @ 2003-12-08 17:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Robert Dewar; +Cc: Richard Kenner, pkoning, gcc
Robert Dewar writes:
> If you google on PL/I you will find zillions of references from third
> parties with no hint of a trademark, so I think you can safetly talk
> about GNU PL/1 without worrying!
Trademark law is complex, I strongly advise against anyone giving
amateur legal opinions in this area :-)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: Name of front-end
2003-12-06 18:23 ` Gerald Pfeifer
2003-12-07 9:15 ` Henrik Sorensen
@ 2003-12-08 17:11 ` Joe Buck
1 sibling, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Joe Buck @ 2003-12-08 17:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Gerald Pfeifer; +Cc: Henrik Sorensen, Andreas Jaeger, gcc
On Sat, Dec 06, 2003 at 06:42:26PM +0100, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> On Sat, 6 Dec 2003, Henrik Sorensen wrote:
> > But does it matter for the name of the front-end, whether or not the
> > copyright has been assigned ?
>
> No necessarily, as far as I know. However, you must not call any software
> "GNU Something" unless the FSF explicitly approved that, so you should do
> that first.
Unfortunately, since the FSF allowed gnuplot to get away with it, their
ability to stop others is in question. Given this history, I would still
say that we should strongly REQUEST people not to use "GNU XYZ" without
talking to the FSF, as it will only confuse the public.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: Name of front-end
2003-12-08 16:55 Richard Kenner
@ 2003-12-08 17:03 ` Robert Dewar
2003-12-08 17:40 ` Andrew Haley
2003-12-08 18:37 ` Dale Johannesen
1 sibling, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread
From: Robert Dewar @ 2003-12-08 17:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Richard Kenner; +Cc: pkoning, gcc
Richard Kenner wrote:
> FWIW, some IBM 360 PL/1 manuals I just looked at do not mark or claim
> "PL/1" as trademark.
>
> But certainly some did. And contemporary lore was that they trademarked PL/2,
> PL/3, etc ...
Hmm, Richard, what is your authority/reference for this? I can find no
evidence that PL/I was trademarked. I very much doubt that PL/1 is
trademarked since IBM always uses PL/I (letter I), not PL/1 (digit 1) in
their product literature
As for PL/2 etc, that's surely bogus, since such names were never used
in commerce (a requirement for trademarking something!)
If you google on PL/I you will find zillions of references from third
parties with no hint of a trademark, so I think you can safetly talk
about GNU PL/1 without worrying!
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: Name of front-end
@ 2003-12-08 16:55 Richard Kenner
2003-12-08 17:03 ` Robert Dewar
2003-12-08 18:37 ` Dale Johannesen
0 siblings, 2 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Richard Kenner @ 2003-12-08 16:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pkoning; +Cc: gcc
FWIW, some IBM 360 PL/1 manuals I just looked at do not mark or claim
"PL/1" as trademark.
But certainly some did. And contemporary lore was that they trademarked PL/2,
PL/3, etc ...
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: Name of front-end
2003-12-06 11:31 ` Andrew Haley
2003-12-06 14:24 ` Robert Dewar
2003-12-06 14:31 ` Henrik Sorensen
@ 2003-12-08 15:28 ` Paul Koning
2 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Paul Koning @ 2003-12-08 15:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: aph; +Cc: henrik.sorensen, gcc
>>>>> "Andrew" == Andrew Haley <aph@redhat.com> writes:
Andrew> Is PL/1 a trademark?
FWIW, some IBM 360 PL/1 manuals I just looked at do not mark or claim
"PL/1" as trademark.
paul
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: Name of front-end
2003-12-06 18:23 ` Gerald Pfeifer
@ 2003-12-07 9:15 ` Henrik Sorensen
2003-12-08 17:11 ` Joe Buck
1 sibling, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Henrik Sorensen @ 2003-12-07 9:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Gerald Pfeifer; +Cc: gcc
On Saturday 06 December 2003 18:42, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> On Sat, 6 Dec 2003, Henrik Sorensen wrote:
> > But does it matter for the name of the front-end, whether or not the
> > copyright has been assigned ?
>
> No necessarily, as far as I know. However, you must not call any software
> "GNU Something" unless the FSF explicitly approved that, so you should do
> that first.
That's one of the reasons I ask.
Anyway, I got enough answers that basically all say the same thing, that the
copyrigths ought to be assigned to FSF.
>
> (I don't have the link handy, but I'm quite sure there is something on the
> main GNU site at http://www.gnu.org.)
http://www.gnu.org/prep/maintain.html#SEC_Top
> Gerald
Thanks to all who replied
Henrik
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: Name of front-end
2003-12-06 14:39 ` Henrik Sorensen
2003-12-06 16:41 ` Toon Moene
2003-12-06 18:23 ` Gerald Pfeifer
@ 2003-12-06 20:45 ` Marc Espie
2 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Marc Espie @ 2003-12-06 20:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc
In article <Pine.BSF.4.58.0312061840220.28341@acrux.dbai.tuwien.ac.at> you write:
>On Sat, 6 Dec 2003, Henrik Sorensen wrote:
>> But does it matter for the name of the front-end, whether or not the
>> copyright has been assigned ?
>
>No necessarily, as far as I know. However, you must not call any software
>"GNU Something" unless the FSF explicitly approved that, so you should do
>that first.
'Must not', or 'should not' ? Is GNU registered as a trademark or something
that prevents its use like this ? And then what should the status of
gnuplot be ?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: Name of front-end
2003-12-06 14:39 ` Henrik Sorensen
2003-12-06 16:41 ` Toon Moene
@ 2003-12-06 18:23 ` Gerald Pfeifer
2003-12-07 9:15 ` Henrik Sorensen
2003-12-08 17:11 ` Joe Buck
2003-12-06 20:45 ` Marc Espie
2 siblings, 2 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Gerald Pfeifer @ 2003-12-06 18:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Henrik Sorensen; +Cc: Andreas Jaeger, gcc
On Sat, 6 Dec 2003, Henrik Sorensen wrote:
> But does it matter for the name of the front-end, whether or not the
> copyright has been assigned ?
No necessarily, as far as I know. However, you must not call any software
"GNU Something" unless the FSF explicitly approved that, so you should do
that first.
(I don't have the link handy, but I'm quite sure there is something on the
main GNU site at http://www.gnu.org.)
Hope this helps,
Gerald
--
Gerald Pfeifer (Jerry) gerald@pfeifer.com http://www.pfeifer.com/gerald/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: Name of front-end
2003-12-06 14:39 ` Henrik Sorensen
@ 2003-12-06 16:41 ` Toon Moene
2003-12-06 18:23 ` Gerald Pfeifer
2003-12-06 20:45 ` Marc Espie
2 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Toon Moene @ 2003-12-06 16:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: henrik.sorensen; +Cc: Andreas Jaeger, gcc
Henrik Sorensen wrote:
>>>Would there be any objections against naming the compiler front-end the
>>>"GNU PL/1 compiler" ?
>>
>>What's the copyright situation of the code? Did you assign it to the
>>FSF?
> Currently I have not assigned the copyrigths, but this is clearly my
> intentions. But to be honest, there isn't much going on in pl1 the compiler
> yet. It is basically just a scanner and parser that gets invoked from gcc.
That was the state of GNU Fortran 95 four years go - yet Andy Vaught,
its author, assigned copyrights to the FSF. It makes it clear where
you're heading w.r.t inclusion into the official GCC repository.
Hope this helps,
--
Toon Moene - mailto:toon@moene.indiv.nluug.nl - phoneto: +31 346 214290
Saturnushof 14, 3738 XG Maartensdijk, The Netherlands
Maintainer, GNU Fortran 77: http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/g77_news.html
GNU Fortran 95: http://gcc.gnu.org/fortran/ (under construction)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: Name of front-end
2003-12-06 13:47 ` Andreas Jaeger
@ 2003-12-06 14:39 ` Henrik Sorensen
2003-12-06 16:41 ` Toon Moene
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Henrik Sorensen @ 2003-12-06 14:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andreas Jaeger; +Cc: gcc
> > Would there be any objections against naming the compiler front-end the
> > "GNU PL/1 compiler" ?
> What's the copyright situation of the code? Did you assign it to the
> FSF?
Currently I have not assigned the copyrigths, but this is clearly my
intentions. But to be honest, there isn't much going on in pl1 the compiler
yet. It is basically just a scanner and parser that gets invoked from gcc.
There is still a very long way to have a workable compiler, let alone, having
it ready for inclussion in the gcc main tree. I would get the assignment of
copyrights going, only when I actually had something working to show.
But does it matter for the name of the front-end, whether or not the copyright
has been assigned ?
> > And name the directory for the pl/1 compiler for gnupl1 ?
> If you like to integrate it into GCC, the directory name would most
> probably be just pl1, see the other frontends that GCC has.
Good point. I will keep it as pl1.
> Andreas
Thanks
Henrik
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: Name of front-end
2003-12-06 11:31 ` Andrew Haley
2003-12-06 14:24 ` Robert Dewar
@ 2003-12-06 14:31 ` Henrik Sorensen
2003-12-08 15:28 ` Paul Koning
2 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Henrik Sorensen @ 2003-12-06 14:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Haley; +Cc: gcc
> > Would there be any objections against naming the compiler front-end the
> > "GNU PL/1 compiler" ?
> >
>
> Is PL/1 a trademark? If it is, you'll have to call it something like
> "The GNU compiler for the PL/1 programming language."
Trademark or not, I do like your suggestion
>
> Andrew.
Thanks
Henrik
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: Name of front-end
2003-12-06 11:31 ` Andrew Haley
@ 2003-12-06 14:24 ` Robert Dewar
2003-12-06 14:31 ` Henrik Sorensen
2003-12-08 15:28 ` Paul Koning
2 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Robert Dewar @ 2003-12-06 14:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Haley; +Cc: Henrik Sorensen, gcc
Andrew Haley wrote:
> Is PL/1 a trademark? If it is, you'll have to call it something like
>
> "The GNU compiler for the PL/1 programming language."
>
> Andrew.
Trademark law is complex, I strongly advise against anyone giving
amateur legal opinions in this area :-)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: Name of front-end
2003-12-06 9:57 Henrik Sorensen
2003-12-06 11:31 ` Andrew Haley
@ 2003-12-06 13:47 ` Andreas Jaeger
2003-12-06 14:39 ` Henrik Sorensen
1 sibling, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread
From: Andreas Jaeger @ 2003-12-06 13:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: henrik.sorensen; +Cc: gcc
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 829 bytes --]
Henrik Sorensen <henrik.sorensen@balcab.ch> writes:
> For more some time now, I have been working on a gpl'ed PL/1 front-end for
> GCC, well, just a few hours every week.
>
> Would there be any objections against naming the compiler front-end the
> "GNU PL/1 compiler" ?
What's the copyright situation of the code? Did you assign it to the
FSF?
> And name the directory for the pl/1 compiler for gnupl1 ?
If you like to integrate it into GCC, the directory name would most
probably be just pl1, see the other frontends that GCC has.
> I first thought of gpl1, but it seems gpl is already used ;-)
Andreas
--
Andreas Jaeger, aj@suse.de, http://www.suse.de/~aj
SuSE Linux AG, Deutschherrnstr. 15-19, 90429 Nürnberg, Germany
GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 188 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Name of front-end
2003-12-06 9:57 Henrik Sorensen
@ 2003-12-06 11:31 ` Andrew Haley
2003-12-06 14:24 ` Robert Dewar
` (2 more replies)
2003-12-06 13:47 ` Andreas Jaeger
1 sibling, 3 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Haley @ 2003-12-06 11:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Henrik Sorensen; +Cc: gcc
Henrik Sorensen writes:
>
> For more some time now, I have been working on a gpl'ed PL/1 front-end for
> GCC, well, just a few hours every week.
>
> Would there be any objections against naming the compiler front-end the
> "GNU PL/1 compiler" ?
>
> And name the directory for the pl/1 compiler for gnupl1 ?
>
> I first thought of gpl1, but it seems gpl is already used ;-)
>
> Thanks for your comments
Is PL/1 a trademark? If it is, you'll have to call it something like
"The GNU compiler for the PL/1 programming language."
Andrew.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Name of front-end
@ 2003-12-06 9:57 Henrik Sorensen
2003-12-06 11:31 ` Andrew Haley
2003-12-06 13:47 ` Andreas Jaeger
0 siblings, 2 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Henrik Sorensen @ 2003-12-06 9:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc
For more some time now, I have been working on a gpl'ed PL/1 front-end for
GCC, well, just a few hours every week.
Would there be any objections against naming the compiler front-end the
"GNU PL/1 compiler" ?
And name the directory for the pl/1 compiler for gnupl1 ?
I first thought of gpl1, but it seems gpl is already used ;-)
Thanks for your comments
Henrik
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2003-12-09 14:34 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <1070947232.17483.ezmlm@gcc.gnu.org>
2003-12-09 14:26 ` Name of front-end Victor Maurice Faubert
2003-12-09 15:37 ` Robert Dewar
2003-12-08 16:55 Richard Kenner
2003-12-08 17:03 ` Robert Dewar
2003-12-08 17:40 ` Andrew Haley
2003-12-08 23:44 ` Robert Dewar
2003-12-08 23:51 ` Laurent GUERBY
2003-12-09 1:32 ` Robert Dewar
2003-12-09 0:00 ` Daniel Berlin
2003-12-08 18:37 ` Dale Johannesen
[not found] ` <dalej@apple.com>
2003-12-08 19:15 ` Felix Lee
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-12-06 9:57 Henrik Sorensen
2003-12-06 11:31 ` Andrew Haley
2003-12-06 14:24 ` Robert Dewar
2003-12-06 14:31 ` Henrik Sorensen
2003-12-08 15:28 ` Paul Koning
2003-12-06 13:47 ` Andreas Jaeger
2003-12-06 14:39 ` Henrik Sorensen
2003-12-06 16:41 ` Toon Moene
2003-12-06 18:23 ` Gerald Pfeifer
2003-12-07 9:15 ` Henrik Sorensen
2003-12-08 17:11 ` Joe Buck
2003-12-06 20:45 ` Marc Espie
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).