search for: e3332d60

> > #4 is interesting, but a *ton* of work. The Object library, most of Support > and System, all would have to sink into this core module, all would have to > get dual-licensed (ow!!! how? some of the contributors are around to agree > to new license, but not all... likely a fair amount of rewrite required to > produce new versions of libraries under the correct license). You

...d > a general exception to the LLVM license, or switch wholesale to MIT > license. > This is indeed the question: what should the end state be. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20120531/e3332d60/attachment.html>

On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > > On May 31, 2012, at 1:20 PM, Chandler Carruth wrote: > > On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 1:13 PM, Rafael Espíndola < > rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 31 May 2012 05:02, Alexey Samsonov <samsonov at google.com> wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > tl;dr