Re: GCC2 merging (was "native language support now available")
>> > They gained a short-term advantage by not asking
contributors for
>> > legal papers, the way I do; that endangers the ability to enforce the
>> > GPL for XEmacs.[1]
[1] Copyright assignment papers or not, I don't know of anyone
"in
the XEmacs camp" who has any desire whatsoever to endanger the GPL
status of XEmacs. As far as I'm concerned un-GPLing XEmacs would have
to occur over my dead body.
A desire, no. The idea between the copyright assignments is to avoid
dangerous mistakes, especially given the bunch a papers you seem to
have to sign selling your soul to your employer when you want to work
in the US.
The egcs/gcc seems on the way to resolution:
Richard Stallman (rms(a)gnu.org)
Tue, 13 Oct 1998 01:26:54 -0400
How do you propose to progress this - is there even a real issue
beyond turf war?
I'm open to having the EGCS team become the GCC maintainers
and making EGCS the official version of GCC.
But the attitude of rms towards XEmacs is quite sad. The people who
has originally done the fork isn't there anymore. Nursing a grudge is
stupid.
OG.