From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4061 invoked by alias); 11 Oct 2002 02:30:53 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 4047 invoked from network); 11 Oct 2002 02:30:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO crack.them.org) (65.125.64.184) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 11 Oct 2002 02:30:51 -0000 Received: from nevyn.them.org ([66.93.61.169] ident=mail) by crack.them.org with asmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 17zqVW-0007Wi-00; Thu, 10 Oct 2002 22:30:34 -0500 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 17zpZh-0002Cs-00; Thu, 10 Oct 2002 22:30:49 -0400 Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 19:30:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Fred Viles Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: libremote status? Message-ID: <20021011023049.GA8352@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Fred Viles , gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <3DA5D2A0.6277.13A0987@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3DA5D2A0.6277.13A0987@localhost> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2002-10/txt/msg00104.txt.bz2 On Thu, Oct 10, 2002 at 07:18:56PM -0700, Fred Viles wrote: > Dang, bitten by the listserver (and my inattention) again. Sorry for > the PM, Chris. > > ------- Forwarded message follows ------- > From: Fred Viles > To: Christopher Faylor > Subject: Re: libremote status? > Date sent: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 19:17:07 -0700 > > On 9 Oct 2002 at 15:03, Christopher Faylor wrote about > "Re: libremote status?": > > | On Wed, Oct 09, 2002 at 02:42:35PM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > | >On Wed, Oct 09, 2002 at 09:39:53AM -0700, Kevin Buettner wrote: > | >I assume that, given the name change, there is no plan for RDA to be > | >contributed to the FSF? And that, as such, there can be no effort to > | >combine all this beautiful server architecture with the fact that we > | >have a working gdbserver implementation, and active development on it? > | > | We will not be releasing this to the FSF, no. We still need to hold > | the copyright for various reasons. > > OTOH, according to the comment blocks at the start of every file you > are releasing it under the GPL. Doesn't that mean that it can be > incorporated into other GPL'ed projects pretty much without > additional restriction? I obviously son't understand the issues > here... In general, yes; GNU projects, no. Remember the oft-mentioned copyright assignment forms? It's FSF policy (usually) that the FSF hold copyright on the entire source base of a GNU project like GDB. It's a reasonable policy; it gives the FSF close control over licensing issues and centralizes copyright defense if it should become necessary. I believe those are the reasons. [And I want to apologize again to Chris and others for my tone in that quote; I do really appreciate the work they've done to get this project released to the community.] -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer