4 ms·
What would be the point of that? Upstream will never accept GPL licensed patches and your fork is also available under the Apache license from the original sour
by Thiez 3y ago
What would be the point of that? Upstream will never accept GPL licensed patches and your fork is also available under the Apache license from the original source (except the readme changes that nobody cares about).
- eru 3y agoThe point is that this way you can get an LLVM that's licensed the same way as GCC. This whole exercise has a point, if and only if there's a point to insisting that GCC's license is fine, but LLVM's license ain't. It's just a reduction. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduction_(complexity) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduction_(complexity) If you don't have any problem with the license of LLVM in the first place, the reduction is obviously useless to you.
- Thiez 3y agoI thought the point of having something GPL licensed would be that you actually get to enjoy/enforce the copyleft clauses of the GPL. By just relicensing an existing non-copyleft project and not following up with any significant development you only get the illusion of a copyleft project. If you are happy with this license mirage you are essentially saying you only care about the GPL name and not about copyleft. It's just nerdy virtue signalling.
- eru 3y agoAnyone (sub-) licensing LLVM from you would be bound by the GPL.