Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

LLVM Still Proceeding With Their Code Relicensing

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • LLVM Still Proceeding With Their Code Relicensing

    Phoronix: LLVM Still Proceeding With Their Code Relicensing

    It's been three years since the original draft proposal for relicensing the LLVM compiler code was sent out and while there hasn't been a lot to report on recently about the effort, they are making progress and proceeding...

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...lisencing-2018

  • #2
    Typo in article URL:

    Originally posted by phoronix View Post
    Relisencing

    Comment


    • #3
      Michael, GPLv23?

      Comment


      • #4
        Funny how people thought only GPL2/3 involves drama. If you ask the corporations, WTFPL/MIT/PD is the best license.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by caligula View Post
          Funny how people thought only GPL2/3 involves drama. If you ask the corporations, WTFPL/MIT/PD is the best license.
          For the corporations surely. For the software or for end users? Debatable.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by reavertm View Post

            For the corporations surely. For the software or for end users? Debatable.
            Does it really matter for most end users?

            It it is interesting that in this article you have people quoted as saying in one case the new license is a good thing and in the same case another saying it is a bad thing. So one person is pro change and another not! Both can’t be right.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Duve View Post
              Michael, GPLv23?
              Wow, they sure went hella fast from v3 to v23! GPL is the new Google Chrome!

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by reavertm View Post

                For the corporations surely. For the software or for end users? Debatable.
                I've never heard of WTFPL or PD, but what's wrong with MIT for end users?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Vistaus View Post

                  I've never heard of WTFPL or PD, but what's wrong with MIT for end users?
                  Software using it protects the copywrite holder not the end user or even the developers in some cases. Those licenses were designed such that software using them can be affectively proprietary. It's great for corporations that want proprietary software but don't want to develop it, but then the development burden ends up entirely on the open source devs, ala freebsd as an example or llvm as another example. They both have ton's of proprietary forks that will -never- have their modifications upstreamed.

                  On the other hand AMD uses it because they need their open source drivers to work on many different OSes which have incompatible licenses. But secretly I think the real reason is because they have proprietary forks of it....

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    BSD-style licenses work great for libraries and infrastructure code, where you want it to get into as many projects as possible, whether OSS or proprietary. The more people that use it, the better.

                    Copyleft-style licenses work better for end-user applications, where you want to keep the applications themselves open (source, use, and otherwise). It's too bad these are used for libraries and infrastructure code as well, which leads to a lot of duplication of effort as people write non-copyleft versions of the libraries.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X