Re: MMIX port to be submitted, licensing issue

["J. Johnston" <jjohnstn at cygnus dot com>]

Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 6 Nov 2001, Jeff Johnston wrote:
> > Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> > > I'd like to submit a newlib port for the MMIX, to go with the
> > > recent binutils and gcc ports.
> > >
> > > What licensing terms are acceptable for new ports?  It looks
> > > like the LGPL used, and the mailing list indicate that the
>                  ^ isn't.  Doh.
> 
> > > licensing terms should be "freer".  I'd prefer to go with LGPL.
> > > If that's unacceptable, how about the following in
> > > COPYING.NEWLIB, copied or referred to in each file:
>    [...]
> 
> >   I prefer you to go with the non-LGPL, COPYING.NEWLIB approach,
> 
> Two different preferences, but no requirements.  What to do?
> I'll just be difficult and ask again: Is or is not LGPL acceptable?
> 
> > assuming that you are the original author of the code.
> 
> Yes, I'm the original author.
> 

Ok, I'll be more direct.  Please submit with the BSD-style license.

Newlib does not accept proprietary or GPL code.  Newlib avoids LGPL code
and will not accept LGPL modifications to shared files (e.g. headers).
Please note that I say "avoid" and not "exclude", but this is reserved for
special cases whereby
functionality enhancements are added that are complex to implement properly but
may exist readily in LGPL form (e.g. threading support).  Such enhancements
would be
enabled/disabled by configuration and would be disabled by default.
I do not see this as being such a special case of complex functionality
being added to the library.

-- Jeff J.