Just a quick clarification. I wrote: "As far as I know, the library itself was correctly licensed though." Obviously, given the foregoing, that isn't what I meant to say.
This is to be taken in the context of the parenthetical remark in the following statement from the GMP website: "a renamed GMP that was initially based on GMP 4.1.3 (although they inadequately for a long time released their GMP version under LGPL 2)." I should have written, "As far as I know, we didn't attempt to license the MPIR library itself v2+ instead of license it v2.1+ though", which is what I meant to say in the context of my discussion. If this was intended to be about the LGPL v3+ patch issue or the FSF compliance issues, then it is completely misstated. It doesn't belong in a parenthetical statement about MPIR originally being based on GMP 4.1.3 (even if that were correct). My apologies for misstating. Bill. On 24 May, 19:13, Bill Hart <goodwillh...@googlemail.com> wrote: > OK, I made a little bit of a change to the "about" section of the MPIR > website. It now has: > > "MPIR is an open source multiprecision integer (bignum) library forked > from the <a href="http://gmplib.org/";>GMP (GNU Multi Precision)</a> > project. It consists of much code from past GMP releases, in > combination with much original contributed code." > > I doubt that addresses the concern you had, but it is, in my opinion, > clearer and simpler than what we had. In particular I removed the bit > about originally being a fork of GMP 4.2.1 (which was LGPL v2+), etc. > I don't think that information is particularly useful or serving any > definite purpose any more, though there wasn't anything particularly > wrong with it. > > But again, I'm happy to change something if it isn't clear, or perhaps > I should say that the new MPIR webmaster will (I've just been > transferring credentials over for that). > > Bill. > > On 24 May, 18:43, Bill Hart <goodwillh...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Interesting observation. Do you think we should state the original > > reasons for the fork? Bear in mind, some of these reasons are no > > longer valid, e.g. GMP now has an open repository. > > > We also aren't releasing new versions under LGPL 2.1+ ourselves any > > more. After extensive consultation we decided to switch to v3+. The > > only exception is MPIR 1.2.x which is LGPL v2.1+. I don't know of > > anyone who has volunteered to take on the project of extending this in > > any way. It's our intention to fix any bugs found in it only. I > > suppose this might generate some new releases, but only very minor > > updates. It certainly isn't a focus for development. > > > I think we do make a pretty big fuss about MSVC support on our website > > though. That will shortly change to MSVC 2010 support. We should also > > be making a big fuss about 64 bit Windows assembly code, as that is > > another feature of MPIR (note the Windows calling conventions differ > > from the linux ones, so you have to modify the assembly code). > > > Remember that we forked GMP years ago. I'm not sure it is a wise idea > > to state on the MPIR website what our original reasons for a fork > > were. Wouldn't that merely be reopening old wounds? > > > I think the current ambitions of the MPIR project are all that really > > matters and that is all stated pretty clearly. I'm sure we'd be happy > > to reword if you think something should be added, though. > > > Bill. > > > On 24 May, 17:47, leif <not.rea...@online.de> wrote: > > > > On 24 Mai, 15:59, Bill Hart <goodwillh...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > > > [...] > > > > I *apologise unreservedly* for upsetting the GMP > > > > developers. This flame war, whether well-intentioned or not, is much > > > > to be regretted. It would have been better to simply state we forked > > > > because we wished to support Windows development, have an open > > > > repository and, at the time, continue with an LGPL v2.1+ licensed > > > > library whilst GMP moved on with v3+, so that other v2+ projects had > > > > time to assess v3+. That would have been more reasonable on our part. > > > > We were naive in the extreme to not expect the hostile response we > > > > got. This we regret deeply. > > > > [...] > > > > The MPIR web site (http://www.mpir.org/#about) does not state this, > > > especially not the motivation for the fork. > > > > -Leif > > > > -- > > > To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to > > > sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > > > For more options, visit this group > > > athttp://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel > > > URL:http://www.sagemath.org > > > -- > > To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to > > sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > > For more options, visit this group > > athttp://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel > > URL:http://www.sagemath.org > > -- > To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to > sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel > URL:http://www.sagemath.org -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
