[M3devel] parse.c licensing question, dual?

Tue Jun 28 07:37:17 CEST 2016

I can understand RMS's reaction, since this subverts the spirit of the license, by introducing a process boundary to break the linkage, where normally and conceptually there is a linkage, but I"m wondering about the letter not the spirit. :)

> As I understand it, because parse.c is an integrated front-end to gcc it must carry the GPL license

This isn't clear to me. There is some notion of "GPL compatible", which includes BSD licenses.

 > Since it is based on other gcc code it becomes GPL

Also slightly unclear -- "based on" could be 99% resembling or 1% resembling.

In either case...on my big list, maybe, is write a new front end in C or C++ and integrate with gcc or LLVM.
Or write out C (which is, still, an integrate path for gcc/LLVM).
I can translate *most* of Modula-3 to C in my head -- it almost trivially isomorphic.
There are a few parts of the ABI that aren't obvious to me -- open arrays and exceptions.
I understand part of them -- but e.g. the "dynamic construction" of exceptions, seems to almost resemble C++, but that doesn't really compute for me in the context of Modula-3.

I also suspect it matters less now.
There are larger enemies now.

 - Jay

----------------------------------------
> From: hosking at purdue.edu
> To: jay.krell at cornell.edu
> CC: rodney.m.bates at acm.org; m3devel at elegosoft.com
> Subject: Re: [M3devel] parse.c licensing question, dual?
> Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2016 05:14:53 +0000
>
> As I understand it, because parse.c is an integrated front-end to gcc it must carry the GPL license. Since it is based on other gcc code it becomes GPL-contaminated. I recall that Stallman hit the roof when he found out that M3 was using a shim front-end to gcc the allowed M3 to avoid GPL.
>
>> On 28 Jun 2016, at 3:00 PM, Jay K <jay.krell at cornell.edu> wrote:
>>
>> Links paste funny.
>>
>> I'll try again:
>>
>> 1.17
>>
>> https://modula3.elegosoft.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/cm3/m3-sys/m3cc/gcc/gcc/m3cg/parse.c?rev=1.17;content-type=text%2Fplain
>> vs.
>>
>> v1.18
>>
>> https://modula3.elegosoft.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/cm3/m3-sys/m3cc/gcc/gcc/m3cg/parse.c?rev=1.18;content-type=text%2Fplain
>>
>>
>> Tony, you changed from..er...hold on..
>> that was not really a change.
>>
>>
>> here vs. 1.12:
>>
>> https://modula3.elegosoft.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/cm3/m3-sys/m3cc/gcc/gcc/m3cg/parse.c?rev=1.12;content-type=text%2Fplain
>>
>> /* Copyright (C) 1993, Digital Equipment Corporation */
>> /* All rights reserved. */
>> /* See the file COPYRIGHT for a full description. */
>>
>>
>> v 1.13:
>>
>>
>> Copyright (C) 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
>>
>> This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it
>> under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the Free
>> Software Foundation; either version 2, or (at your option) any later
>> version.
>> ...
>>
>> Merge with gcc-core-3.4.5. This is now the default backend.
>>
>>
>> in either case, there is a notion of "GPL compatible".
>>
>> For example the BSD licenses are GPL compatible.
>> They can be linked with GPL, or such.
>>
>> And then..there is the question of derivation and ownership.
>>
>> There is only a few thousand lines here.
>>
>> The slightly interesting part is the reading of the IR.
>> The building up of gcc tree's is gcc specific.
>>
>> - Jay
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------
>>> From: jay.krell at cornell.edu
>>> To: rodney.m.bates at acm.org; m3devel at elegosoft.com
>>> Subject: RE: [M3devel] parse.c licensing question, dual?
>>> Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 20:42:51 +0000
>>>
>>> Tony changed the license from DEC to FSF here (possibly someone else did in another branch)
>>>
>>> <a href="https://modula3.elegosoft.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/cm3/m3-sys/m3cc/gcc/gcc/m3cg/parse.c.diff?r1=1.12;r2=1.13" target="_blank" class="newlyinsertedlink">https://modula3.elegosoft.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/cm3/m3-sys/m3cc/gcc/gcc/m3cg/parse.c.diff?r1=1.12;r2=1.13</a>
>>>
>>>
>>> There is this growth:
>>>
>>> jair:~ jay$ wc -l parse.c.current
>>> 6516 parse.c.current
>>>
>>> jair:~ jay$ wc -l parse.c.old
>>> 4190 parse.c.old
>>>
>>> though derivation is still hard to argue with.
>>>
>>> - Jay
>>>
>>>
>>> ----------------------------------------
>>>> From: jay.krell at cornell.edu
>>>> To: rodney.m.bates at acm.org; m3devel at elegosoft.com
>>>> Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 20:30:57 +0000
>>>> Subject: Re: [M3devel] parse.c licensing question, dual?
>>>>
>>>> Some number should be reasonable yes, but I think you exaggerate how much I've done. :)
>>>> I'll look later.
>>>>
>>>> - Jay
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ----------------------------------------
>>>>> Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 15:26:39 -0500
>>>>> From: rodney_bates at lcwb.coop
>>>>> To: m3devel at elegosoft.com
>>>>> Subject: Re: [M3devel] parse.c licensing question, dual?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 06/27/2016 03:19 PM, Jay K wrote:
>>>>>> Thank you. I was hoping that. So parse.c isn't stuck if it had an answer, and m3-def isn't stuck because I wrote it (possibly derived from DEC -- it is closely related to the rest of m3cg).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But parse.c might be ownerless and stuck?
>>>>>
>>>>> Isn't there some law that if more than 25% of a work is changed, it ceases
>>>>> to be a derived work but becomes a new work by the changer? If so, I would
>>>>> guess the current parse.c would meet this criterion, and I think Jay would
>>>>> own it, since I think he has done the majority of the changes.
>>>>>
>>>>> IANAL.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Jay
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ----------------------------------------
>>>>>>> Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 22:17:38 +0200
>>>>>>> From: lemming at henning-thielemann.de
>>>>>>> To: jay.krell at cornell.edu
>>>>>>> CC: hosking at purdue.edu; m3devel at elegosoft.com
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [M3devel] parse.c licensing question, dual?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, 27 Jun 2016, Jay K wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Can the owner relicense parse.c,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sure, the owner can always relicense.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> or it is stuck with GPL because it links to gcc?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> He can choose any license that is compatible with GPL.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> M3devel mailing list
>>>>>> M3devel at elegosoft.com
>>>>>> https://m3lists.elegosoft.com/mailman/listinfo/m3devel
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Rodney Bates
>>>>> rodney.m.bates at acm.org
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> M3devel mailing list
>>>>> M3devel at elegosoft.com
>>>>> https://m3lists.elegosoft.com/mailman/listinfo/m3devel
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> M3devel mailing list
>>>> M3devel at elegosoft.com
>>>> https://m3lists.elegosoft.com/mailman/listinfo/m3devel
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> M3devel mailing list
>> M3devel at elegosoft.com
>> https://m3lists.elegosoft.com/mailman/listinfo/m3devel
>