From: John E. / T. <td...@td...> - 2013-09-18 00:51:46
|
Hi folks, This message is mainly a heads-up for Kai and the rest of the MinGW-w64 developers. I am planning to release the next version of TDM-GCC, based on the MinGW-w64 runtime libraries (including winpthreads), with a prominently-displayed notice about license changes, reproduced at the end of this email. I have elected to canonize winpthreads and the "--enable-threads=posix" configure option for TDM-GCC for the foreseeable future. However, this will have the result of infecting every executable that is compiled with default options (e.g. "gcc -o a.exe a.c") with winpthreads and its MIT-style license, where previously a user could have relied solely on public-domain (MinGW-w64) and GPLv3+exception (GCC runtime) licensed library code. This adds a new requirement of reproducing the winpthreads license with every binary distribution. For now, I'm not going to argue about whether or not the benefits of this license outweigh its drawbacks. For me, the ability to have C++11 threading support definitely outweighs the drawback of having to include more documentation. I suppose I'm really not fully decided on the matter yet. However, I do feel that the change warrants prominent notice to TDM-GCC's users, and will proceed thusly. -John E. / TDM _______________________________________________________________________________ Hi! Sorry for the interruption, but you may want to take at least a few seconds to look into some recent license changes for the software you're about to install. Parts of the "winpthreads" library will be compiled into every binary file (EXE or DLL) you create. It's a necessary evil that is currently required in order to provide support for threads and concurrency in programs compiled by GCC. The license for winpthreads requires you to reproduce its text in every copy or substantial portion of the winpthreads library that you distribute. This means that that even if you just want to distribute a single small executable, created with a MinGW-w64-based GCC (like TDM-GCC, or any pthreads-based x86_64-w64 GCC release), you must include a copy of that license. Check the license out in the file "COPYING.winpthreads.txt", which will be installed along with TDM-GCC. Consult with a lawyer if you have any concerns about how you can use this software. Does this new license hurt your usage of GCC? Let the developers know! File a feature request asking them to change the winpthreads license or get rid of GCC's winpthreads requirement, at: https://sourceforge.net/p/mingw-w64/feature-requests/new/ Send an email to the MinGW-w64 mailing list, at: min...@li... _______________________________________________________________________________ |
From: Adrien N. <ad...@no...> - 2013-09-18 06:10:30
|
Hi, On Tue, Sep 17, 2013, John E. / TDM wrote: > Hi folks, > > However, this > will have the result of infecting every executable that is compiled with > default options (e.g. "gcc -o a.exe a.c") with winpthreads and its > MIT-style license, where previously a user could have relied solely on > public-domain (MinGW-w64) and GPLv3+exception (GCC runtime) licensed > library code. This adds a new requirement of reproducing the winpthreads > license with every binary distribution. Please keep in mind that the ability to put your own work into the "Public Domain" is pretty much limited to the anglo-saxon law. It's pretty much what is described on wikipedia: > Few if any legal systems have a process for reliably donating works to > the public domain. They may even prohibit any attempt by copyright > owners to surrender rights automatically conferred by law, > particularly moral rights. An alternative is for copyright holders to > issue a licence which irrevocably grants as many rights as possible to > the general public, e.g., the CC0 licence from Creative Commons. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Domain#Dedicating_works_to_the_public_domain I'm not a lawyer and I'm not going to tell you how something that can be done in Anglo-saxon law "travels" to other countries where you cannot do that but afaiu it doesn't work well (probably becomes full copyright: i.e. no right granted to others). Only thing is that people trying to put something in PD have probably had no interest in complaining about that... Anyway, a license probably beats PD. That's why CC0 was created. Regards, Adrien Nader |