Apologies for not replying sooner. Busy busy.
On Wed, 2009-03-11 at 05:42 -0700, Eric House wrote:
> I'm filing an "Intent to Package" which wants to know:
>
> * Version? Is there a more recent tarball than 0.51.0 that has a version
> number associated? I guess I'm looking for something like a "stable"
> snapshot to start with -- if there is such a thing. Worst case I guess
> I pull the trunk and use 0.0.<svn rev> :-)
That is the most recent version.
> * author[s]? Danny and Pedro? Ok to include the emails you use here?
Using our names : yes. (Pedro, speak up if you don't agree.)
Using E-mail addresses ? Hmm, I'd like to avoid that. Can you leave them
out ? Or can you put cegcc-devel@lists.sourceforge.net in ? It's more
appropriate than our individual addresses.
> * licence? GPL, right?
Heh, no.
A mixture of several licences. Gcc has the same thing, cegcc is just as
bad. One of the reasons for multiple licences is the same as with gcc :
the library that gets linked in should not be GPL otherwise you get the
"viral" behaviour that the press likes to talk about.
Another reason is that e.g. newlib has another license than gcc.
Danny
--
Danny Backx ; danny.backx - at - scarlet.be ; http://danny.backx.info
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Cegcc-devel mailing list
Cegcc-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cegcc-devel
