From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 50078 invoked by alias); 21 Feb 2019 17:51:43 -0000 Mailing-List: contact jit-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: Sender: jit-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 50062 invoked by uid 89); 21 Feb 2019 17:51:43 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Checked: by ClamAV 0.100.2 on sourceware.org X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=dual, strategic, resistance, interests X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on sourceware.org X-Spam-Level: X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Thu, 21 Feb 2019 17:51:42 +0000 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx07.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DB03D3082B58; Thu, 21 Feb 2019 17:51:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ovpn-116-177.phx2.redhat.com (ovpn-116-177.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.116.177]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BF7C1001DC5; Thu, 21 Feb 2019 17:51:40 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <1550771499.29992.175.camel@redhat.com> Subject: Re: licensing questions From: David Malcolm To: Paulo Matos , jit@gcc.gnu.org Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2019 00:00:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.22 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.45]); Thu, 21 Feb 2019 17:51:41 +0000 (UTC) X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2019-q1/txt/msg00063.txt.bz2 On Thu, 2019-02-21 at 18:23 +0100, Paulo Matos wrote: > Hi, > > libgccjit is released with GCC and therefore GPLv3. > This seems to mean, from my relatively low knowledge in this area, > that > all libraries linking to libgccjit to create bindings and libraries > and > applications linking to this library are forced into GPLv3. > > I though LGPL was created with the purpose of stopping the viral > spread > of GPLv3. Was it the authors decision to make it GPLv3 instead of > LGPL - > which would have been, I guess, more flexible? [I am not a lawyer, and I don't represent anyone here] IIRC, my thinking at that time was that the GCC-as-shared-library feature might be controversial (as well as a technical challenge), and I didn't want to have to also deal with a license debate on top of those two. Hence I went with the GPLv3 as a path of last resistance. I haven't yet run into any issues with the license in my own work (but all my work is free software, so...) The FSF owns the copyright here. Perhaps a case could be made that it might serve the FSF's strategic interests to allow some kind of dual licensing of libgccjit, but I'm not sure either way. (It's not something I want to spend my own cycles on pursuing, but if someone else cares, fair enough; I suspect that that's more a topic for an FSF- strategy-focused-list, rather than this mailing list, though). Dave