| |||||||||||||
It's very clear cut, actually...It's very clear cut, actually...Posted Jun 1, 2011 7:12 UTC (Wed) by khim (subscriber, #9252)In reply to: How much GNU is there in GNU/Linux? by dlang Parent article: How much GNU is there in GNU/Linux?
When you contribute to GNU you assign your copyright to FSF. As long as you do that yes, it's GNU contribution. Is it voluntary or not is good question, but it's clearly part of GNU. If the supposed fork will stop assigning copyrights to FSF you can claim it's no longer GNU project (like happened with XEmacs). The history shows it's not easy to maintain viable full-blown fork of GNU software (it's possible to maintain set of incremental patches like EGLibC does - but this hardly can be called a separate forked project).
(Log in to post comments)
It's very clear cut, actually... Posted Jun 1, 2011 13:16 UTC (Wed) by nicooo (guest, #69134) [Link] GCC is a fork that has been maintained since 1997.
Sorry, but no... Posted Jun 2, 2011 8:28 UTC (Thu) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link] EGCS was an experiment in new development methodology and never tried to split from GNU. All changes were always assigned to FSF and when EGCS was renamed to GCC it still accepted FSF's (actually RMS) decisions WRT to licenses, etc. Basically it never tried to stray away from guidance of FSF so there never was any need to fight with it. Emacs/XEmacs was such a split while xemacs is quite successful you rarely can find it installed by default. True, association with GNU is very often a burden and the only thing it gives the project is exposure - but this is quite important for free projects...
|
|||||||||||||