1. Computers
  2. Display Drivers
  3. Graphics Cards
  4. Memory
  5. Motherboards
  6. Processors
  7. Software
  8. Storage
  9. Operating Systems


Facebook RSS Twitter Twitter Google Plus


Phoronix Test Suite

OpenBenchmarking.org

LLVM Offered Into The Software Freedom Conservancy

Free Software

Published on 19 September 2012 03:12 AM EDT
Written by Michael Larabel in Free Software
13 Comments

The LLVM project applied to be part of the Software Freedom Conservancy and the Conservancy's Project Evaluation Committee has approved of accepting the increasingly popular open-source compiler infrastructure.

Bradley Kuhn announced that the evaluation committee has approved of accepting LLVM for the Software Freedom Conservancy. As described from their website, "The Software Freedom Conservancy is a not-for-profit organization that helps promote, improve, develop, and defend Free, Libre, and Open Source Software (FLOSS) projects. Conservancy provides a non-profit home and infrastructure for FLOSS projects. This allows FLOSS developers to focus on what they do best — writing and improving FLOSS for the general public — while Conservancy takes care of the projects' needs that do not relate directly to software development and documentation."

Bradley's message was sent to the LLVM developers' list but is not appearing at the moment within the public archives at the moment, so it's been embedded below.
I'm sorry for the intrusion of a project policy discussion onto the developer list, but there may be many here who may have thoughts, input, or question regarding Conservancy's offer for LLVM's membership, discussed below. If you're not interested in that topic, please feel free to ignore this message.

TL;DR: LLVM applied to the Conservancy and has been offered membership. The FSA template should be reviewed by all interested parties.

Full Details:

I am excited to inform you that Conservancy's Project Evaluation Committee has approved LLVM for membership in the Software Freedom Conservancy.

If LLVM proceeds to accept membership, the next step is to negotiate a formal agreement between the project and the Conservancy, which is called
a fiscal sponsorship agreement (FSA). You can find a template of the agreement available on Conservancy's website at:
http://sfconservancy.org/members/apply/ConservancyFSATemplate.pdf
http://sfconservancy.org/members/apply/conservancy-fsa-template.tex

Generally, Conservancy leaves it for the LLVM community to decide how you'd like to discuss the document internally. Note that signing such an agreement is a big step for the project and you should consider the agreement carefully, in whatever forum is most appropriate for your community.
Conservancy strongly suggests that a public discussion of the FSA occur on the general discussion list for developers of your project, which is why I've posted this information here on your public list.

Conservancy representatives would be glad to answer questions from the community as you consider the document, and you should feel comfortable cc'ing us on any discussion threads. Meanwhile, you are also welcome to batch questions into one group as well and email them to us directly, and just repost the responses. Basically, whatever works well for you works fine for us.

Also cc'ed is Conservancy's "Project Intake group", which can be reached by the alias project-intake@sfconservancy.org and is comprised of the
following people: Bradley M. Kuhn, Tony Sebro, Jeremy Allison, Tom Callaway, Martin Michlmayr

All of us are members of Conservancy's Project Evaluation Committee and will be happy to answer questions and you should also feel free to cc that address, too, if you'd like, when asking questions.

Meanwhile, Conservancy's detailed discussion will mostly be with the application leads, Chris Lattner and Tanya M. Lattner. Ultimately, Conservancy will rely on the application leads to coordinate the final details of the FSA with Conservancy.

Specifically, note that the FSA template is in fact, just that, a template. Most notably, we'll need to figure out together two key terms of the agreement:

(a) who the initial signatories should be (ideally it should include anyone who has ever made substantial contributions to the project),

(b) who the Project Leadership Committee (PLC) should be, how it should govern itself, and what it should be called. Note there are a few examples in the FSA template of how other projects have done this, but they are just guidelines, not choices. The most important thing is to write something that describes the natural and existing leadership structure of your project.

Meanwhile, there are a few other minor issues that we've raised in a private thread with the application leads.

We look forward to LLVM joining Conservancy. But, Conservancy does realize that you are also talking to other potential fiscal sponsors, and we definitely encourage this. We want LLVM to find the right home; perhaps that is Conservancy, but if not, we understand!

--
Bradley M. Kuhn, Executive Director, Software Freedom Conservancy

About The Author
Michael Larabel is the principal author of Phoronix.com and founded the web-site in 2004 with a focus on enriching the Linux hardware experience and being the largest web-site devoted to Linux hardware reviews, particularly for products relevant to Linux gamers and enthusiasts but also commonly reviewing servers/workstations and embedded Linux devices. Michael has written more than 10,000 articles covering the state of Linux hardware support, Linux performance, graphics hardware drivers, and other topics. Michael is also the lead developer of the Phoronix Test Suite, Phoromatic, and OpenBenchmarking.org automated testing software. He can be followed via and or contacted via .
Latest Linux Hardware Reviews
  1. A Walkthrough Of The New 32 System Open-Source Linux Benchmarking Test Farm
  2. Habey MITX-6771: Mini-ITX Board With Quad-Core J1900 Bay Trail
  3. OCZ Vector 150 SSD On Linux
  4. Noctua i4 CPU Cooler: Great For Cooling High-End LGA-2011v3 CPUs
Latest Linux Articles
  1. AMD Kaveri: Open-Source Radeon Gallium3D vs. Catalyst 14.12 Omega Driver
  2. 12-Way AMD Catalyst 14.12 vs. NVIDIA 346 Series Linux GPU Comparison
  3. AMD Catalyst 14.12 Omega Driver Brings Mixed Results For Linux Users
  4. 6-Way Winter 2014 Linux Distribution Comparison
Latest Linux News
  1. Linux 3.19-rc1 Kernel Released Ahead Of Schedule
  2. Civilization: Beyond Earth Linux GPU/Driver Benchmarks
  3. X.Org Server 1.16.3 Released To Fix Security Issues
  4. Linux 3.19 Merge Window Closes Ahead Of Schedule
  5. MIPS R6 Architecture Now Supported By GCC
  6. LowRISC To Feature Tagged Memory & Minion Cores
  7. Intel Skylake Audio Support For Linux 3.19
  8. After 10+ Years, NetworkManager Reaches v1.0
  9. VDPAU Updated To v0.9
  10. An Open Hardware Random Number Generator Proposed
Latest Forum Discussions
  1. FPS capped on Linux (AMD fglrx drivers)
  2. Need some hand holding with upgrading xserver
  3. Are there an app using HSA ?
  4. The New SuperTuxKart Looks Better, But Can Cause GPU/Driver Problems
  5. XLennart: A Game For Systemd Haters With Nothing Better To Do
  6. Updated and Optimized Ubuntu Free Graphics Drivers
  7. Debian init discussion in Phoenix Wright format
  8. Bench specific mount point