ANNOUNCEMENT: GNU-D opens up shop

[Anders F Björklund]

Bruno Medeiros wrote:

>> DMD is copyright Digital Mars, and GDC is copyright David Friedman,
>> DMD licensed under GPL v1 and GDC under GPL v2 (should be compatible)
>>
>> To *really* be "the GNU D Compiler", both of these must sign their
>> copyright over to "Free Software Foundation, Inc.", I suppose... ?
[...]
> As I am a rabid fan of correct nomenclature (for those who haven't 
> noticed...), if GDC is not GNU, then maybe it should not be called "GNU 
> D Compiler". I don't know what it means to be "GNU" though (and I'm not 
> bothered to check it out now), so I don't know if GDC is a "GNU D 
> Compiler".

Normally it means that it is sanctioned by the Free Software Foundation.
http://directory.fsf.org/GNU/

That is, that the software is part of the GNU project - not just GPL...
http://www.gnu.org/gnu/thegnuproject.html


For instance, the Linux kernel is GPL but not part of the GNU project.
(GNU has their own kernel called HURD, but that's a whole other topic)

And you are right of course, we should get this matter sorted out good
by getting both of Digital Mars and Free Software Foundation involved.


The backup plan is "D Compiler for GCC", or even "D Front End for GCC"
However, the others are called: GNU C Compiler, GNU C++ Compiler, etc.

--anders