On 04/26/2010 10:53 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
Chris Lattner<clatt...@apple.com> writes:
This is a often repeated example, but you're leaving out the big
part of the story (at least as far as I know). The license *did
not* force the ObjC frontend to be merged back into GCC, there were
other factors at work. This 'victory' has nothing to do with the
license, but it did cause them to release the code.
Yes. I was pointing out that forcing the release of the code *also*
caused the code to be contributed to the FSF. As you say, other
factors were at work, but that's OK: there are always other factors.
There's a funny side effect here:
One of the major reasons I bought a NeXT Station in November 1991 was
that I considered NeXT's move to use free software a significant point
on the scale of "doing something differently from the rest".
Little did I know the problems that were underlying these decisions.
Which made me one of the ~ 10,000 proud owners of a NeXT Station (now
retired) at the cost of a reasonably sized family car :-)
--
Toon Moene - e-mail: t...@moene.org - phone: +31 346 214290
Saturnushof 14, 3738 XG Maartensdijk, The Netherlands
At home: http://moene.org/~toon/; weather: http://moene.org/~hirlam/
Progress of GNU Fortran: http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.5/changes.html#Fortran
