Hacker News Reader

First, why should they contribute? You make it sound like a problem for the FOSS guys being exploited, but the choice of license is usually made explicitly to allow third parties to profit from their project without the burden of contribution.

Second, despite not having to contribute, license while, LLVM has still seen so much contribution from big companies (Apple for one) that the whole argument is moot.

Third, I meant companies like RedHat, or projects like Mongo, MySQL and others -- far more successful money-wise than most niche commercial compilers the kind that you appear to be a fan of while deriding FOSS for not making money...

The niche commercial compilers I tend to love, happen to have a positive income of several decades, allowing their employees happy lives.

Hardly something that most LLVM FOSS contributors not on university research budgets can enjoy.

Not everyone is replacing GCC with LLVM, and it’s being relicensed under Apache anyways.

I would hazard that that main reason that many (by no means all) FOSS projects are migrating to LLVM is that clang is dramatically easier to work on, and at or over parity in efficiency of output.

They changed to Apache 2.0 recently, actually.