Revert "llvmPackages_15: update licenses" #217906
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This reverts commit 386aba3. As I understand it from reading <https://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#copyright-license-and-patents>, the structure of LLVM licensing is as follows: - They're in the process of relicensing to Apache-2.0 WITH LLVM-exception, but they haven't got permission to relicense all the code yet. This means that some of the code can be used under the new license, but not all of it, and it's difficult to know which is which. This license is therefore probably not useful yet, until the relicensing effort is commit. - While the relicensing effort is ongoing, code being contributed to LLVM has to have permission to be used under the old and new licensing schemes. Since the new licensing scheme can't be used for all code yet, it only makes sense to use LLVM's code under the old licensing scheme at the moment. - The old licensing scheme is that code for the LLVM components we care about is all available under the NCSA license, and some components are optionally available under a different license, usually the MIT license, instead. So I think we should go back to just listing NCSA, or NCSA/MIT, and forget about the new license until it actually becomes useful, i.e. LLVM's relicensing effort is complete.
rrbutani
approved these changes
Feb 23, 2023
48 tasks
rrbutani
added
the
6.topic: llvm/clang
13 tasks
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This reverts commit 386aba3.
As I understand it from reading
https://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#copyright-license-and-patents, the structure of LLVM licensing is as follows:
They're in the process of relicensing to Apache-2.0 WITH LLVM-exception, but they haven't got permission to relicense all the code yet. This means that some of the code can be used under the new license, but not all of it, and it's difficult to know which is which. This license is therefore probably not useful yet, until the relicensing effort is commit.
While the relicensing effort is ongoing, code being contributed to LLVM has to have permission to be used under the old and new licensing schemes. Since the new licensing scheme can't be used for all code yet, it only makes sense to use LLVM's code under the old licensing scheme at the moment.
The old licensing scheme is that code for the LLVM components we care about is all available under the NCSA license, and some components are optionally available under a different license, usually the MIT license, instead.
So I think we should go back to just listing NCSA, or NCSA/MIT, and forget about the new license until it actually becomes useful, i.e. LLVM's relicensing effort is complete.
Description of changes
Things done
sandbox = trueset innix.conf? (See Nix manual)nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review rev HEAD". Note: all changes have to be committed, also see nixpkgs-review usage./result/bin/)