chandlerc added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D36836#931995, @lebedev.ri wrote:
> - Rebased > - As advised by @aaron.ballman, moved into it's own directory/module. Please > review that, i'm not entirely sure i have done that fully correctly. > > @chandlerc Hi! @aaron.ballman has suggested for me to try to talk to you > about this. Is there some precedent for the licensing 'issue' at hand? Do you > have any opinion? @dberlin did not react to the pings, so i'm not sure i > personally can come up with anything better for `LICENSE.txt` Sadly, what you need here is legal advice for a good way to handle this, and I'm not a lawyer and so I can't really give you that advice. To be clear, what you currently have isn't OK for several reasons, not least of which what Aaron brought up that this is not in fact a license. > If there are no further ideas, i'll try to contact sonarsource. Unless Danny can volunteer his time, we finish with relicensing efforts and can devote the foundation's lawyer's (sadly precious) time to this, I think either you or sonarsource working to understand the best legal way to contribute this would be the best way forward. Sorry that this is a tricky situation. Happy to have a private discussion w/ your or sonarsources's lawyer via my @llvm.org email address if useful. Repository: rCTE Clang Tools Extra https://reviews.llvm.org/D36836 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
