From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [216.205.24.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3AEC23954455 for ; Tue, 1 Jun 2021 15:08:36 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 3AEC23954455 Received: from mail-pg1-f197.google.com (mail-pg1-f197.google.com [209.85.215.197]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-145-JhOdla3CNaOcVk55zKnc3Q-1; Tue, 01 Jun 2021 11:08:33 -0400 X-MC-Unique: JhOdla3CNaOcVk55zKnc3Q-1 Received: by mail-pg1-f197.google.com with SMTP id 28-20020a63135c0000b029021b78388f01so9000276pgt.23 for ; Tue, 01 Jun 2021 08:08:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=KwlF+qW+SaNCR48zjZBx3LvLEaVPzQ1jRZW+tqFntQA=; b=uneIhSO/i6toW2a0huwlNpKy7CBQiAwW615wJGPilB41KUk2ikx6R3Fv83ML3YN6kR ETa+pwFcJJwMqfUvSA9Q3KV5fgedm6AyFnG9P5sDcqiMvjmM2qcBgsL/9yj1KnTVdwCt vxNoC3lNu10ciG3rq4gtuEmnCGQZlrxRIV4yY4dKXQhq9hrSlbOqTXHaJiBcpV0Ml3KC HOwdxAqfHhaqrbhhb9QsxFb8OUFqK6r1e4n4StzwrKE22LPl8GQsOBooZVyV7EGQmtJL LEmtH0yZ+Iro/D6Kr4t+L6V3Ap055pvxHFXTwcCK11CS7ByDt+WOI7XkLWUhVFryUmlF cDqw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533jUtzyKJvdjR47oe7PJC2oXyM6CBVRjxjlPUwQO2xwpKq7cIN2 4COLLAI24MItdSoXc2zRhC2OsKGd+QBb0nAOdV0i0VAX74rryuH9kW80p6rDkgRv51+Dx+1gDZT L0d+Jm7mp+rrs9+mwnJezDIk= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a00:1992:b029:2df:b93b:49a with SMTP id d18-20020a056a001992b02902dfb93b049amr22452828pfl.11.1622560112596; Tue, 01 Jun 2021 08:08:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyat/oQWGB5GM6PD9yGCGFty5DuTi+tq+yymPXwIFuwusQa6t0TzAFQxXc623xK/foUaC4IWxm0wFF+E+K25e8= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a00:1992:b029:2df:b93b:49a with SMTP id d18-20020a056a001992b02902dfb93b049amr22452797pfl.11.1622560112231; Tue, 01 Jun 2021 08:08:32 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <7b75512d-05a-89f4-6d63-fded84b91d@mimosa.com> In-Reply-To: <7b75512d-05a-89f4-6d63-fded84b91d@mimosa.com> From: Jason Merrill Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2021 11:08:21 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Update to GCC copyright assignment policy To: "D. Hugh Redelmeier" Cc: GCC Development X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.29 X-BeenThere: gcc@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 Jun 2021 15:08:37 -0000 On Tue, Jun 1, 2021 at 10:52 AM D. Hugh Redelmeier wrote: > | From: Mark Wielaard > > | This seems a pretty bad policy to be honest. > | Why was there no public discussion on this? > > Agreed. I also agree with the rest of Mark's message. > > (Note: I haven't contributed to GCC but I have contributed to other > copylefted code bases.) > > It is important that the pool be trustable. A tall order, but > solvable, I think. > > Two pools (FSF for old stuff, something else, for new stuff if the > contributor prefers) should be quite managable. > > This would allow, for example, moving to an updated copyleft if the > two pools agreed. It is important that the governance of the pool be > trustable. > > We've trusted the FSF and now some have qualms. A second pool would > be a check on the power of the first pool. > > Individual unassigned copyright pretty much guarantees that the > copyright terms can never be changed. I don't think that that is > optimal. > GCC's license is "GPL version 3 or later", so if there ever needed to be a GPL v4, we could move to it without needing permission from anyone. But GPL3 has been a good license for GCC; giving up the theoretical ability to change the license (other than to a later GPL) does not seem like a significant loss. Jason