search for: 326bf3ff

On Sun, 2 May 2004, Reid Spencer wrote: > I don't see moving the repository to another system and forking the code > base as equivalent. I agree that its definitely not time to fork the > code base. But we can change the source code control repository without > forking. Sure, I didn't mean to say they were equivalent, it's just that they would both solve this problem.

On Sat, 2004-05-01 at 20:57, Chris Lattner wrote: > > (b) move the CVS repository somewhere that doesn't have the University's > > restrictions. That last option, however, may have additional > > intellectual property issues. > > I don't think that there would be IP issues: LLVM is (effectively) BSD > licensed, so it could be forked at any time without a