license (was: Self on Solaris for Intel?)

[Jecel Assumpcao Jr]

> > Gordon Cichon started rewriting the compilers to generate code for the
> > PC (on Linux, but it would be even simpler to make it work on Intel
> > Solaris) and I have looked into continuing this. Gordon's work was
> > released under the GPL (since he borrowed from "gas", there wasn't any
> > choice) and I was wondering what the people in this list think of
> > having the PC version of Self under a more restrictive license than the
> > Sparc and Mac versions (which is BSD-like).
> 
> I think it would be absolutely horrible, and utterly useless to me.
> 
> Join the Linux crowd, please.

Please explain. I was asking if people would mind a GPLed PC Self
(which would be joining the Linux crowd, I suppose) or if they feel it
is important to use the current license instead (which allows you to do
anything you want).

If everybody is ok with (or prefers) the GPL, then it is just a matter
of continuing what Gordon started. If not, then all he did would have
to be repeated (either from scratch or from a source other than gas).

I would note that both OpenSelf (http://openself.org/) and JSelf
(http://www.ConsultAr.com/JSelf/) seemed to use the GPL, but now I can
find no mention of that on their web sites. Downloading them, I was
able to see that both were indeed released under the GPL.

-- Jecel