From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13433 invoked by alias); 28 Jul 2010 22:08:41 -0000 Received: (qmail 13423 invoked by uid 22791); 28 Jul 2010 22:08:41 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-fx0-f47.google.com (HELO mail-fx0-f47.google.com) (209.85.161.47) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 28 Jul 2010 22:08:06 +0000 Received: by fxm12 with SMTP id 12so1877982fxm.20 for ; Wed, 28 Jul 2010 15:08:04 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.239.137.199 with SMTP id m7mr611924hbm.214.1280354884175; Wed, 28 Jul 2010 15:08:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.239.140.201 with HTTP; Wed, 28 Jul 2010 15:08:04 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4C509E54.6090401@codesourcery.com> References: <4BFC6EF0.4090908@codesourcery.com> <20100714172307.3687a9c4@shotwell> <4C48D2C4.5000103@codesourcery.com> <4C48D60E.3000604@codesourcery.com> <20100726175013.20b12428@shotwell> <4C4E35B8.6010301@codesourcery.com> <4C4E37FC.1060208@adacore.com> <4C4F010C.5060401@codesourcery.com> <20100727180738.GU17485@synopsys.com> <4C4F20E8.5050206@codesourcery.com> <4C509E54.6090401@codesourcery.com> Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2010 22:08:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: GFDL/GPL issues From: Steven Bosscher To: Mark Mitchell Cc: Richard Guenther , Joe Buck , Robert Dewar , Benjamin Kosnik , Ian Lance Taylor , "gcc@gcc.gnu.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2010-07/txt/msg00410.txt.bz2 On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 11:17 PM, Mark Mitchell wro= te: > Steven Bosscher wrote: > >>> Why not just ignore RMS and the license issues and simply do what we >>> think suits us and the project. =A0Let the FSF deal with the legal cons= equences, >>> they put us in this messy situation, they deal with it. >> >> It seems to me that escalating the issue is more helpful. GCC is not >> the only project with this problem. > > Sadly, at this point, RMS is simply taking the position that this is not > a problem worth solving. Ah, how the "free" in Free Software Foundation takes a whole different meaning when it comes to actual freedom... Ciao! Steven