The economics of D

[Bill Baxter]

Dan wrote:
> Sean Kelly Wrote:
> 
>> Frits van Bommel wrote:
>>> Peter C. Chapin wrote:
>>>> dan wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> My only major concern lies in that d isnt open source and is 
>>>>> therefore bound to walter.  if he goes, so does D.
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe we should get life insurance on him?
>>>> Is there any reason (I'm thinking legal, mostly) why someone else
>>>> couldn't in principle independently implement a D compiler? The D
>>>> community is reasonably large and full of smart people, so I'm sure the
>>>> talent exists. Right now the motivation for creating a third party
>>>> compiler is low, but if Walter disappeared that might change.
>>> An independent D compiler isn't a problem. There are even several in the 
>>> works already.
>>> The more likely problem is the D spec: it's copyrighted by Digital Mars, 
>>> so only Digital Mars (and those it authorizes[1] to do so) may 
>>> distribute it (and presumably nobody else may distribute modified 
>>> versions). So until copyright runs out (unless Walter/Digital Mars 
>>> transfers control of the spec over to some other person or 
>>> organization[2]) the only option for continued evolution of the language 
>>> may be a complete rewrite of the spec (perhaps based on the available 
>>> compiler, but not on the current spec).
>>>
>>>
>>> [1] I'm not sure if anyone else is currently authorized; even Tango 
>>> (which has permission to redistribute DMD itself) seems to leave the 
>>> spec out of their binary distributions that include DMD.
>> Frankly, it's a topic we never broached with Walter.  We've simply been 
>> trying to keep the inclusion of Digital Mars stuff to a minimum as an 
>> act of good faith.
> 
> Walter,make it gnu if u pass on.  i dont trust anyone in particular to carry the torch.

(channeling Walter)
"It is gnu already.  GDC."

--bb