[protomyth]

I guess I see it a bit different and GCC is a pretty good example.

LLVM and clang can be used in pretty much any project. They have provided every developer tools to use in anyway we wish. GCC's parts cannot be included in other projects because they are licensed in such a way that tells us that the GCC code is more important than the code we are using. Why does a 1,000 line GPL count for more than 100,000 lines of some other license?

I think the best community is a voluntary one, and with security the way it is, I would rather developers who don't want to be part of the community benefit from the code just as I like the idea of everyone (who can) being vaccinated.

GPL generates a self-selected community that has barriers to participation with other communities because the GPL code is held as more important than the rest.

[fafner]

> GCC's parts cannot be included in other projects because they are licensed in such a way that tells us that the GCC code is more important than the code we are using.

That's simply not true.

[protomyth]

So, if Apple had incorporated GCC's parser into Xcode like they have included clang's, what would have been the effect?

[fafner]

They would have to honour GCC's license, like they have to do with clang's license or any other piece of software.

[protomyth]

And would honoring that license require them to release the source for the non-GPL licensed parts of Xcode and perhaps require some action on any patents implemented in that non-GPL code?

[fafner]

They have to honour the license. Which provides and guarantees basic freedoms. But it allows the code to be reused in any project honouring the license. So your initial statement is false.

[protomyth]

Nope, my basic statement is true. You didn't answer the question and by "code" you don't just mean the GPL code. The GPL tries to affect all code in the project not just the GPLed code.