[llvm-commits] [test-suite] r157636 - in /test-suite/trunk/MultiSource/Benchmarks/tscp181: ./ LICENSE.txt Makefile board.c book.c book.txt data.c data.h defs.h eval.c main.c protos.h readme.txt search.c tscp181.reference_output

[Daniel Berlin]

On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 8:16 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> wrote:
> On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 5:07 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger
> <joerg at britannica.bec.de> wrote:
>>
>> [Added Tom explicit to the CC]
>>
>> On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 04:05:49PM -0700, Evan Cheng wrote:
>> >
>> > On May 29, 2012, at 1:50 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
>> >
>> > > On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 01:32:22PM -0700, Evan Cheng wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >> On May 29, 2012, at 12:15 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger
>> > >> <joerg at britannica.bec.de> wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >>> On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 07:08:04PM -0000, Evan Cheng wrote:
>> > >>>> Author: evancheng
>> > >>>> Date: Tue May 29 14:08:03 2012
>> > >>>> New Revision: 157636
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=157636&view=rev
>> > >>>> Log:
>> > >>>> Add TSCP (Tom Kerrigan's Simple Chess Program) to llvm test suite
>> > >>>> with Tom Kerrigan's explicit permission.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Can this permission be reflected in the LICENSE.txt? Especially what
>> > >>> he
>> > >>> explicitly gave permission for?
>> > >>
>> > >> He gave permission for tscp to be included in the text suite
>> > >> including the text in LICENSE.txt.
>> > >
>> > > My problem is that ATM the license reads:
>> > >
>> > > +According to copyright law, you are not allowed to distribute copies
>> > > of TSCP
>> > > +without Tom Kerrigian's authorization.
>> > > +
>> > > +This notice must not be removed.
>> > > +This software must not be sold for profit.
>> > >
>> > > It says explicit I am not allowed to create copies without asking him
>> > > first. That is quite a big IP minefield for someone shipping LLVM
>> > > source
>> > > code as part of a software distribution. Additionally, the "must not
>> > > be
>> > > sold for profit" prevents selling a bundle of full LLVM sources e.g.
>> > > with a custom frontend or as part of a larger system, if following the
>> > > wording of the license. I don't think that's acceptable.
>> >
>> > Ok, I don't believe it's Tom's intention is to prevent his code from
>> > being distributed as part of LLVM source. what do you suggest should be
>> > the proper wording? How about?
>> >
>> > This version of TSCP is only distributed as part of the LLVM test suite.
>> > It
>> > may not be modified or redistributed for other purporses.
>>
>> Let me try to describe what I consider required permissions for this
>> purpose and the specific wording can be sorted out as second part.
>
>
> When dealing with license and other such, I'd like to get Danny to weigh in
> officially.

What are the exact things folks want to do with this code?
Just benchmark it?
Will it ever need to be modified?

The problem with wording like
"This version of TSCP is only distributed as part of the LLVM test suite.
It may not be modified or redistributed for other purporses" is that
it doesn't actually grant the right to do anything besides
redistribute.
For example, you would't be able to *run it*, just redistribute it.

(I realize this is being pedantic, but copyright is a set of
enumerated rights, and distribution is a different right than
reproduction is a different right than derivative works).
IE you may want to really be saying "you can benchmark and test with
it, but only as part of the llvm distribution (or something including
the llvm distribution), and you may not charge for it", or something
similar.

If someone gives me *exactly the cases* we want to allow, i can work
up 2 or 3 sentences that cover those cases and still make it clear it
can't be used outside of them.

>
> -Chandler