The Death of D. (Was Tango vs Phobos)
Nick B
nick.barbalich at gmail.com
Thu Aug 14 03:30:20 PDT 2008
Walter Bright wrote:
> Paul D. Anderson wrote:
>> But what I
>> would really like to see (and I don't think it's asking too much) is
>> a clear statement from Walter that he will indeed make the changes
>> the Tango developers are asking for at some future date.
>
> In order for this to happen, I need a clear and unambiguous statement
> from the Tango developers that Phobos can incorporate parts of the Tango
> runtime and place them under the Phobos license. I have already provided
> a reciprocal license to Tango.
>
> I've asked for that for over a year, and so far only Sean and Don have
> done so.
>
> Such an agreement is necessary for the following reasons:
>
> 1. To ensure Phobos is free of any legal taint and any accusations of
> stealing code.
>
> 2. To avoid the untenable issue of a single module in Phobos having
> different license for different lines of code.
>
> I have explained this to the main Tango developers on multiple
> occasions. It is their right and privilege to license Tango as they see
> fit, and I respect that and so have not spoken out on it before. But in
> this thread I am being cast as a roadblock, which I feel is a little
> unfair, so I will loosen my tongue and speak up a bit :-)
[Don wrote] The number of people that have touched the runtime layer of
Tango is very limited.
Walter has confirmed that Sean & Don gave given him the legal statement
he requires.
So who are the other Tango developers who have submitted code for the
runtime layer ?
Would these developers like to comment as to why they would, or would
not, like to give such a legal statement to Walter ?
Nick B.
More information about the Digitalmars-d
mailing list