July 03, 2008
BCS wrote:

> We could do it in reverse; compile the GCC backend as a lib, and ship that and the minimal headers to Walter and then he could develop DMD with that without ever seeing a line of (executable) GCC code. He might even be able to build and ship both GCC and DMC versions of DMD.
> 

But GCC is GPL so merely linking against it automatically taints the code.  Or is the current front end license GPL compatible?

--bb
July 04, 2008
Bill Baxter wrote:
> BCS wrote:
> 
>> We could do it in reverse; compile the GCC backend as a lib, and ship that and the minimal headers to Walter and then he could develop DMD with that without ever seeing a line of (executable) GCC code. He might even be able to build and ship both GCC and DMC versions of DMD.
>>
> 
> But GCC is GPL so merely linking against it automatically taints the code.  Or is the current front end license GPL compatible?
> 
> --bb
Yup. Dual license GPL/artistic. See dmd/src/dmd/gpl.txt
July 04, 2008
Bill Baxter schrieb:
> It's been talked about before, but exactly how much money do the people who own the copyright to DMD's backend want in order to make it freely available freely -- as at least a lib?  It's hard to believe anyone would appraise that thing with a high dollar value given its less than stellar optimization abilities, and since everyone knows you can't make much money off dev tools these days anyway.
> 
> I'd happily chip in $100 US if it meant finally having an official D compiler that anyone can recompile for themselves just by typing "make dmd".
> 
> Or is it more a matter of not being able to find the copyright holders in question to ask them?  If so, give us the names and whatever info you have, and I bet someone will be able to track 'em down.
> 
> --bb
Add 75 euro  bjoern
July 05, 2008
Reply to Bill,

> BCS wrote:
> 
>> We could do it in reverse; compile the GCC backend as a lib, and ship
>> that and the minimal headers to Walter and then he could develop DMD
>> with that without ever seeing a line of (executable) GCC code. He
>> might even be able to build and ship both GCC and DMC versions of
>> DMD.
>> 
> But GCC is GPL so merely linking against it automatically taints the
> code.  Or is the current front end license GPL compatible?
> 
> --bb
> 

even so, wouldn't a .so/.dll get around that?


July 05, 2008
Bill Baxter wrote:
> It's been talked about before, but exactly how much money do the people who own the copyright to DMD's backend want in order to make it freely available freely -- as at least a lib?  It's hard to believe anyone would appraise that thing with a high dollar value given its less than stellar optimization abilities, and since everyone knows you can't make much money off dev tools these days anyway.
> 
> I'd happily chip in $100 US if it meant finally having an official D compiler that anyone can recompile for themselves just by typing "make dmd".
> 
> Or is it more a matter of not being able to find the copyright holders in question to ask them?  If so, give us the names and whatever info you have, and I bet someone will be able to track 'em down.
> 
> --bb

If it where just about money a donation button could be put on the digitalmars website and every other D website, with a target (whatever unreachable number that is).  It would only transfer the amount across when that amount was reached.

I'd give 100.

-Joel
July 12, 2008
Bill Baxter wrote:

> I'd happily chip in $100 US

Because there are some and might be even more donators:

http://www.fundable.com/

-manfred


-- 
Maybe some knowledge of some types of disagreeing and their relation can turn out to be useful: http://blog.createdebate.com/2008/04/07/writing-strong-arguments/
July 12, 2008
Manfred_Nowak wrote:
> Bill Baxter wrote:
> 
>> I'd happily chip in $100 US
> 
> Because there are some and might be even more donators:
> 
> http://www.fundable.com/
> 
> -manfred

That sounds pretty neat.  Would be cooler if they made their money by advertising instead of taking a 10% cut.  10% seems like a lot for doing something that seems rather simple.

--bb
July 13, 2008
Bill Baxter wrote:

> 10% seems like a lot for doing something that seems rather simple.
> 

They claim to be professionals and therefore are likely to know that simplicity, which may result in an openness for negotiation _before_ starting anything on their platform. Because they require goals as low as low 200$, close to 20$ should do for any amount.

-manfred

-- 
Maybe some knowledge of some types of disagreeing and their relation can turn out to be useful: http://blog.createdebate.com/2008/04/07/writing-strong-arguments/
Next ›   Last »
1 2 3
Top | Discussion index | About this forum | D home