From: Daniel Berlin <dberlin@dberlin.org>
To: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@ges.redhat.com>
Cc: Adam Fedor <fedor@doc.com>,
Jason Molenda <jason-swarelist@molenda.com>,
gdb <gdb@sources.redhat.com>
Subject: Re: Apple's Objective-C language patch
Date: Mon, 09 Sep 2002 20:58:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0209092350400.11559-100000@dberlin.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3D7D6BB7.30403@ges.redhat.com>
On Mon, 9 Sep 2002, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> > Jason Molenda wrote:
> >
> > What is the history behind objc-exp.y? Is this from the old
> > gnustep-gdb patch that'd been floating around since the mid-90's
> > (the one that Michael Snyder wrote while at NeXT)? The Apple
> > sources have the ObjC support rolled in c-exp.y; it doesn't seem
> > unreasonable given the overlap between the two expression syntaxes.
> >
> >
> > I got everything, including objc-exp.y from the 'recent' Apple patch. I haven't looked at the latest Apple sources - I didn't know if I should do that since Andrew Cagney told me to work from the patch, but perhaps I misunderstood.
>
> Yes, I would have requested this.
>
> Believe it or not, very recently added to my things to do today list is
> to get an answer to the question: can a third party take random
> Apple/GDB sources and contribute them to the FSF.
Does Apple have a copyright assignment covering this stuff?
If so, then AFAIK, it's already "contributed" in the legal sense, since
the FSF has the copyright to it.It doesn't particular matter *where* the
copies exist (Apple's sources or the FSF sources) or who made them, only
who owns the work. where/who is only important when trying to determine
infringement. The FSF can't be infringing if it owns the work. It's a
slightly unclear issue if you've modified the sources, and have no
copyright assignment with the FSF, and contribute them to GDB (derivative
works and all that jazz).
But as long as the person contributing the apple stuff is either
1. Not making changes to the source in question (in which case their
is no question it's a copy of the original work).
*OR*
2. Has a copyright assignment for GDB work with the FSF.
then there should be no problem (assuming apple has copyright
assignment covering this stuff).
IANAL (yet), and this is not to be construed as "office legal advice".
Just rantings of a loon.
I could get you a definitive opinion fairly quickly from a lawyer if you
like (and you can answer the various assignment questions about the
code/people involved).
>
>
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-09-10 3:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-09-09 13:16 Adam Fedor
2002-09-09 17:34 ` Jason Molenda
2002-09-09 20:30 ` Adam Fedor
2002-09-09 20:49 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-09-09 20:55 ` Jason Molenda
2002-09-09 21:30 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-09-09 23:21 ` Jason Molenda
2002-09-09 20:58 ` Daniel Berlin [this message]
2002-09-09 21:00 ` Daniel Berlin
2002-09-11 9:03 ` Stan Shebs
2002-09-09 21:59 ` Jason Molenda
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Pine.LNX.4.44.0209092350400.11559-100000@dberlin.org \
--to=dberlin@dberlin.org \
--cc=ac131313@ges.redhat.com \
--cc=fedor@doc.com \
--cc=gdb@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=jason-swarelist@molenda.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox