Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Update LLVM's license to Apache 2.0 #25969

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 24, 2024

Conversation

bradcray
Copy link
Member

@bradcray bradcray commented Sep 20, 2024

While reviewing some of our third-party licenses, I happened to notice that the copy of LLVM we redistribute is actually Apache 2.0 licensed, meaning our file was out of date.

The last release with UIUC license was LLVM 8 although some later releases have legacy licenses with UIUC.

The license was changed to Apache License v2.0 with LLVM Exceptions in llvm-project commit 469bdefd448b76c5adcdd67256e9a44fabf7e027 in Jan 2019.

Docs https://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#legacy indicate some of LLVM still uses the old license but as far as we know, nothing that Chapel uses falls into that category.

While reviewing some of our third-party licenses, I happened to notice
that the copy of LLVM we redistribute is actually Apache 2.0 licensed,
meaning our file was out of date.

Jade and Michael checked my work:

Jade: Looks like the last release with UIUC license was LLVM
8. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/release/8.x/llvm/LICENSE.TXT
EDIT: some later releases have legacy licenses with UIUC

Michael: License was changed in

```
commit 469bdefd448b76c5adcdd67256e9a44fabf7e027
Author: Chandler Carruth <chandlerc@gmail.com>
Date:   Sat Jan 19 06:14:24 2019 +0000
```

Docs https://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#legacy indicate some
LLVM stuff still uses the old license. I have no idea what. LLVM
proper and Clang don't seem to.

---
Signed-off-by: Brad Chamberlain <bradcray@users.noreply.github.com>
@bradcray
Copy link
Member Author

@jabraham17 / @mppf : Tagging you as an FYI and thanks for your help. I don't think this actually needs a review, though.

Copy link
Member

@mppf mppf left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Could you update the PR message to summarize Jade/my comments a bit more tersely before merging? Thanks.

Also if you want to be completely accurate, you could call the license "Apache 2.0 with LLVM Exceptions".

@mppf
Copy link
Member

mppf commented Sep 20, 2024

Here is my recommended PR message wording.

While reviewing some of our third-party licenses, I happened to notice that the copy of LLVM we redistribute is actually Apache 2.0 licensed, meaning our file was out of date.

The last release with UIUC license was LLVM 8 although some later releases have legacy licenses with UIUC.

The license was changed to Apache License v2.0 with LLVM Exceptions in llvm-project commit 469bdefd448b76c5adcdd67256e9a44fabf7e027 in Jan 2019.

Docs https://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#legacy indicate some of LLVM still uses the old license but as far as we know, nothing that Chapel uses falls into that category.

@bradcray bradcray merged commit 654204f into chapel-lang:main Sep 24, 2024
7 checks passed
@bradcray bradcray deleted the update-llvm-license branch September 24, 2024 16:16
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants