Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 25 Jan 2013 16:25:41 +0200
From:      Andriy Gapon <avg@FreeBSD.org>
To:        David Chisnall <theraven@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        toolchain@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: Removing default build of gcc
Message-ID:  <510295E5.8060400@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <44ED3C73-4BC0-4EFE-9072-474E6FE32B71@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <74D8E686-3679-46F2-8A08-4CF5DFC020CA@FreeBSD.org> <20130125113122.GN2522@kib.kiev.ua> <1B345827-76F0-49C7-8D54-82866938E0A1@theravensnest.org> <510290A1.5010809@FreeBSD.org> <44ED3C73-4BC0-4EFE-9072-474E6FE32B71@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
on 25/01/2013 16:10 David Chisnall said the following:
> On 25 Jan 2013, at 14:03, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> 
>> on 25/01/2013 15:21 David Chisnall said the following:
>>> This is something that has been said on mailing lists, at BSDCan and at 
>>> DevSummits in the past, without any objections being raised.
>> 
>> A simple test - has there been a core decision that no GPL software must be 
>> shipped with 10.x?
> 
> There can be no such decision until it's all of the bits of GPL'd code in base
> have replacements in and testing has happened.

I disagree.  Core can make a decision to set a goal.

> That is why it is a plan, not
> an accomplished goal.

Right.  The question is - is this a plan set by Core, and so a Project's Plan, or
is this a plan that individual project members have set for themselves?
As long as there are no conflicts in plans or objections to the plan the
distinction is insignificant, but not longer.

> This is why we have the wiki page tracking the progress
> of replacements:
> 
> https://wiki.freebsd.org/GPLinBase

OK.

-- 
Andriy Gapon



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?510295E5.8060400>