Re: new port for Xtensa processors (bfd files)

[Nick Clifton <nickc at redhat dot com>]

Hi Bob,

  As I see it, Tensilica has three choices:

    1. Contribute the tools that generate these files.

       You have already said that Tensilica are not willing to do
       that, and I can understand their position, but I thought that I
       should mention it as an option.

    2. Rescind the contribution of the Xtensa port and delete the
       sources from the binutils repository.

       I hope that it will not come to this.

    3. Change the annotation on the files so that they are no longer
       generated files but master source files.

       This means that the files in the binutils repository would now
       be considered to be ordinary C files and the official master
       versions for any public release of the sources.  In particular
       it means that:

        a. Changes to these files would not automatically be
           contributed back to Tensilica, and would not have to be
           approved by Tensilica before they were applied.

           [There is nothing to stop Tensilica monitoring the files
            and copying any changes made there to their own, private
            versions].

        b. Changes to the interface implemented by the files can be
           made in the public domain, and it is up to Tensilica to
           adopt such changes into its own tools, should it choose to
           do so.

           ie if Tensilica wants to be able to provide its customers
           with drop-in replacements for these files generated by
           their own tools (and presumably with input from the
           customer), then Tensilica has to track changes made in the
           public domain and adapt their tools to match these changes.

           I realise that Tensilica would prefer not to have to do
           this, but I think that this is the price that they will
           have to pay if they want the port to be in the public
           domain.  It certainly is possible to keep track of the
           changes - other companies do it - it just requires a
           little more flexibility on Tensilica's part.

  My preference is for option 3, but if you have any other suggestions
  please let me (and the mailing list) know.  Either way I would
  appreciate it if this issue can be resolved quickly.  

Cheers
        Nick