(original) (raw)

On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 3:26 AM C Bergström via llvm-dev <llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org> wrote:

Umm.. How is Apple or another large company currently handling this if
the current situation is unacceptable? Doesn't Apple ship libc++ by
default? Is it telling them to give attribution in every program
somewhere?

I don't see anyone saying that the current situation is unacceptable. We have special rules around runtime libraries right now to try and address these issues, and we're discussing how they might be addressed with a single license going forward (with the advantages listed in Chris's email).

I also think questions about how specific companies are handling specific products' license compliance requirements (including any part of LLVM's requirements) should be directed to the company so that whatever lawyers represent that company can respond with accurate details. That seems much more like a discussion about a company and a product than an interesting discussion about the right path forward for LLVM's license.