From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21873 invoked by alias); 26 Mar 2002 17:52:11 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 21859 invoked from network); 26 Mar 2002 17:52:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dberlin.org) (64.246.6.106) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 26 Mar 2002 17:52:09 -0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by dberlin.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g2QHq7m10562; Tue, 26 Mar 2002 12:52:07 -0500 Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 09:52:00 -0000 From: Daniel Berlin To: Andrew Cagney cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, Subject: Re: [PATCH] Let dwarf2 CFI's execute_stack_op be used outside of CFI In-Reply-To: <3CA0B459.2050609@cygnus.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-SW-Source: 2002-03/txt/msg00496.txt.bz2 On Tue, 26 Mar 2002, Andrew Cagney wrote: > [I'm sure Richard Stallman doesn't want to be dragged into such an > exchange, however] > > Given there is currently a dispute over the origins of the file > dwarf2cfi.c, I'm removing it from GDB. This doesn't make much sense, since of course, both of us have valid copyright assignments with the FSF. > > Once that dispute has been resolved, the file can, again be accepted. > > I should note that resolving this will likely take time - Jiri is > currently uncontactable, so I'm going to to have to try to follow this > up with his peers. Ask Jan Hubicka (jh@suse.cz), as he asked me to send the code to Jiri. > > sigh, > Andrew > > > I also added my name to the top of the file, since in reality, it's based > >> > > on code I sent Jiri. > > > >> > > >> > I'd let Jiri make that decision. > > > >> No. > >> This is not his decision to make. > >> A lot of it is my code, unchanged (you can check the x86-64.org > >> repository, for the huge change that replaced his code with mine) > >> He never gave me any credit when he contributed it, for some reason, > >> probably because I never asked for it. > >> I've still got the email I sent him when he asked for the code, and i'm > >> sure he'd be happy to confirm he used it. > >> > >> >From a legal standpoint, while the copyright is transfered to the FSF, the > >> non-exclusive license they grant back to the contributors code should go > >> to me as well as Jiri, not just to Jiri. This is part of of the contract of the > >> copyright assignment with the FSF. > >> Thus, in order to ensure this is possible (not that i plan on using the > >> license for anything at the moment), i'm making sure it's clear that the > >> code contributed was not soley Jiri's. > >> So, that way, in the future, if I ever cared to license the code to > >> someone else, or do something with it, I can without someone asserting > >> it's only the FSF and Jiri's. > > > > > > Please be aware, by the way, that if you don't accept the change to the > > top of the file, i'll be forced to go bug RMS/the FSF about it, as I'm > > sure they'd want the code correctly identified as well. > > > > I'm not asking that I be given credit for something I didn't do. Nor am I > > attempting to diminish in any way the size,quantity, or quality, of > > Jiri's contribution. I am simply requesting that it be properly > > identified as a derivation of code I wrote. > > > > It's imperative that the lineage of code be correctly identified (in fact, > > if GDB had a legal team, it's the first thing they'd do). In most cases, > > you can determine it from the cvs annotate/the changelogs. However, for > > new contributions, there is no history. Since I never sent the code > > in question to gdb-patches, it also has no record there. > > > > I only care because I've been getting an increasing number of requests > > from companies wanting to buy the source code to the C++ debugger I wrote > > to replace GDB ( Of course, it uses a variant of the code in question to > > read/execute frame ops). I blanket refuse such requests in the hopes that > > they'll take the money and pay for GDB work instead, but it's something > > i'd consider if times ever got really tough. If there is one thing > > having three rabbits (rabbits can't learn through negative reinforcement. > > i.e. reprimanding them after they have done something wrong does no good) > > as pets has taught me, it's that it's much easier to make sure a situation > > never happens, than it is to try to do something about it when it > > occurs. > > > > It's not just me, either. If Jiri/SuSE wanted to license the code to > > someone, he/they might accidently sign something saying he was the sole > > author, which could make him/them liable, etc. > > > > In short, i'm simply trying to eliminate something that could come back to > > bite me, or others, in the ass, later. > > > > If you really want proof it's my code, I can happily provide this as well. > > > > Since I know you get bogged down in mail, i'll give you till the end of > > the month before I go bug RMS and the FSF about this. > > > > --Dan > > > > > > > >