d in learning more, *reply to this email* and one of
> our reps will be in touch with our company domain.
>
> Regards,
> Olivia
>
> If you are not interested and find this email intrusive, please reply
> REMOVE and we will not reach out again.
>
--
Gregory Casamento
GNUstep L
disclaimer that UC sent them still hasn't cleared
> the FSF copyright office. Worse yet, the clerk hasn't responsed to
> emails in the past few months. No one should have to suffer through
> this just to donate their time to an open source project.
> Jack
>
--
All,
Hey guys I'm wondering if there's a timeline for incorporating the
Objective-C 2.0 changes from Apple into the trunk of GCC.
If not, I would like to know what the GNUstep project can do to help
make this happen.
Thanks very much. :)
Sincerely, GC
--
Gregory Casamento
As far as I'm aware apple has an assignment for changes to gcc, so it
should be possible to pull them in.
On Tuesday, July 21, 2009, wrote:
> Op 21 jul. 2009 21:50 schreef Paolo Bonzini :
>> Gregory Casamento wrote:
>>
>> > Hey guys I'm wondering if there&
SD
license does not encourage or oblige the developer to contribute bug
fixes or new features back even if they distrubute the compiled
result.
It is up to you which license you feel is best for your purposes in any case.
Later, GC
--
Gregory Casamento
Open Logic Corporation, Principal Consulta
essage earlier in this same
thread bears out that many technical decisions on GCC were, in fact, made for
political reasons and that GCC should carefully consider which ones should be
rescinded.
Sincerely,
Gregory Casamento
(Sorry for the repost, I didn’t know whether or not it was deliver
ense then and I don’t believe they make sense now, especially
given clang’s growing prominence. I believe it is better to compete on
functionality and make certain people want to use GCC because it offers more
features and better features than clang, not because of any political agenda.
> --
> Eric Botcazou
Gregory Casamento
