4 ms·

I'm at CppCon and attended the talk today where Microsoft announced this to the CppCon attendees. The folks speaking made it clear that they do intend to accep

by jfultz 7y ago

I'm at CppCon and attended the talk today where Microsoft announced this to the CppCon attendees. The folks speaking made it clear that they do intend to accept pull requests, and that they're positive about it being used outside of the VC++ environment under the appropriate license (Apache 2 with LLVM Exception).

lsllc 7y ago
What's the LLVM Exception? (asking for a friend ...)
- wyldfire 7y ago
  From https://llvm.org/foundation/relicensing/LICENSE.txt https://llvm.org/foundation/relicensing/LICENSE.txt --- LLVM Exceptions to the Apache 2.0 License ---- As an exception, if, as a result of your compiling your source code, portions of this Software are embedded into an Object form of such source code, you may redistribute such embedded portions in such Object form without complying with the conditions of Sections 4(a), 4(b) and 4(d) of the License. In addition, if you combine or link compiled forms of this Software with software that is licensed under the GPLv2 ("Combined Software") and if a court of competent jurisdiction determines that the patent provision (Section 3), the indemnity provision (Section 9) or other Section of the License conflicts with the conditions of the GPLv2, you may retroactively and prospectively choose to deem waived or otherwise exclude such Section(s) of the License, but only in their entirety and only with respect to the Combined Software.
  - corysama 7y ago
    Thanks! Now, can anyone ELI5 the high-level goal of this exception? At a glance it looks like GPL2 folks are still not happy with the patent provisions of Apache 2.0 and this is added to appease them.
    - jcranmer 7y ago
      There's two pieces to the exception. The first piece is standard for compilers, and essentially says "our compiler linking in bits of this code into your code doesn't count." It means the license matters if you're modifying the compiler and support libraries yourself, but not if you're merely using the compiler. The second piece revolves around the concerns of mixing licenses: Apache 2 and *GPLv3 are happy in combination, but that's because of some explicit compatibility text in GPLv3; this extends the compatibility text to GPLv2.
  - billyoneal 7y ago
    >Now, can anyone ELI5 the high-level goal of this exception? I am not a lawyer; this is my extremely limited understanding. 1. Normally the Apache license requires attribution, even in binary forms. We can't say "You said #include <string>, now you must staple this to all your binaries". libstdc++ has a similar exception to the GPL for the same reason: http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/manual/license.html http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/manual/license.html 2. Keep GPL folks happy :)

by jfultz 7y ago

lsllc 7y ago

What's the LLVM Exception? (asking for a friend ...)

wyldfire 7y ago
From https://llvm.org/foundation/relicensing/LICENSE.txt https://llvm.org/foundation/relicensing/LICENSE.txt --- LLVM Exceptions to the Apache 2.0 License ---- As an exception, if, as a result of your compiling your source code, portions of this Software are embedded into an Object form of such source code, you may redistribute such embedded portions in such Object form without complying with the conditions of Sections 4(a), 4(b) and 4(d) of the License. In addition, if you combine or link compiled forms of this Software with software that is licensed under the GPLv2 ("Combined Software") and if a court of competent jurisdiction determines that the patent provision (Section 3), the indemnity provision (Section 9) or other Section of the License conflicts with the conditions of the GPLv2, you may retroactively and prospectively choose to deem waived or otherwise exclude such Section(s) of the License, but only in their entirety and only with respect to the Combined Software.
- corysama 7y ago
  Thanks! Now, can anyone ELI5 the high-level goal of this exception? At a glance it looks like GPL2 folks are still not happy with the patent provisions of Apache 2.0 and this is added to appease them.
  - jcranmer 7y ago
    There's two pieces to the exception. The first piece is standard for compilers, and essentially says "our compiler linking in bits of this code into your code doesn't count." It means the license matters if you're modifying the compiler and support libraries yourself, but not if you're merely using the compiler. The second piece revolves around the concerns of mixing licenses: Apache 2 and *GPLv3 are happy in combination, but that's because of some explicit compatibility text in GPLv3; this extends the compatibility text to GPLv2.
- billyoneal 7y ago
  >Now, can anyone ELI5 the high-level goal of this exception? I am not a lawyer; this is my extremely limited understanding. 1. Normally the Apache license requires attribution, even in binary forms. We can't say "You said #include <string>, now you must staple this to all your binaries". libstdc++ has a similar exception to the GPL for the same reason: http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/manual/license.html http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/manual/license.html 2. Keep GPL folks happy :)