<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 02/12/2016 04:52 PM, Chandler
Carruth wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAAwGriGMmAgg=mrstBXQ-DOvfwsP6oS+EiKisLsduMLo1RN5TA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr">On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 3:58 PM Chris Lattner
<<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:clattner@apple.com">clattner@apple.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div style="word-wrap:break-word">On Feb 12, 2016, at 2:29
PM, Philip Reames <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:listmail@philipreames.com" target="_blank">listmail@philipreames.com</a>>
wrote:</div>
<div style="word-wrap:break-word">
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">If so, that
would resolve the licensing concern. In the
future, let's make sure that gets mentioned in the
review/commit thread to avoid confusion.<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div style="word-wrap:break-word">
<div>
<div>I can understand your concern, but for better or
worse, we don’t ask llvm contributors to state the
provenance of their code that they are posting. If
you’re asking for some new rule to be put in place,
please specify what the rule is and what the rationale
for that rule is.</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I don't want to speak for Philip, but I think the thing
that made this a bit different was the explicit statement
that the code came from some particular source (a different
open source project in this case) and that triggered a
concern about whether it was reasonable to contribute it.
That doesn't seem unreasonable.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>For example, when someone contributed a patch from the
GCC fork of the sanitizer runtimes, we asked similar
questions to what Philip has asked here because the
statement that the patch came from somewhere else seemed
directly in conflict with the contributor being able to
correctly contribute it to LLVM.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>That pattern might be a reasonable basis for new
guidelines, or might not. I'm not really trying to have an
opinion about that, just giving some other context.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>-Chandler</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
Chandler explained my thought process better than I would have
managed. :)<br>
<br>
Philip<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>