Re: [rfa] FRV input files

[Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at redhat dot com>]

> Andrew Cagney writes:
>  > Having the FSF distribute this code under anything other than the 
>  > standard GPL would be an "improvised license change".
>
> Ah, so if I wanted to add, say, a regexp package to Binutils releases
> and use it in libopcodes, I'd have to make it GPL right?
> [no answers from the peanut gallery please, I want to hear Andrew's opinion]

``add'' or ``contribute to the FSF''?  ``I[you]'', or the ``FSF''? 
``have to'', or ``should''?

The Free Software Foundation is a movement.  That movement has certain 
objectives, one of which is to make all software Free.  A key device in 
achieving this objective is the GPL.  If the FSF makes its code 
available under a lesser licence then the FSF is compromising its 
objectives.  Any decision to make such a compromise has to be made very 
very carefully.

Consider GCC.  The FSF is not going to modify the strict GPL that 
applies to GCC's YACC input files so that they contained the proposed 
exception.

Andrew