[llvm-dev] RFC: Improving license & patent issues in the LLVM community
Daniel Berlin via llvm-dev
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Mon Oct 19 10:00:14 PDT 2015
On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 9:27 AM, Joerg Sonnenberger via llvm-dev
<llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 08:25:16AM -0700, Chris Lattner via llvm-dev wrote:
>> 1) We could introduce a novel legal solution.
> Please, no.
>> 2) We could require new contributors to sign the Apache CLA.
> To me, this is the most acceptable option of the listed terms.
>> 3) We could relicense all of LLVM under the Apache 2.0 license and add a runtime exception.
> This one I would consider a regression over the status quo. Your list is
> missing "the license is significantly longer and harder to read".
Why is this a consideration?
The apache license is incredibly well known, and easy to analyze.
More information about the llvm-dev