From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id LAA10522; Sat, 10 Apr 2004 11:59:49 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id LAA10814 for ; Sat, 10 Apr 2004 11:59:48 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from smtp1.adl2.internode.on.net (smtp1.adl2.internode.on.net [203.16.214.181]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i3A9xjYM028089 for ; Sat, 10 Apr 2004 11:59:46 +0200 Received: from [192.168.1.200] (ppp116-94.lns1.syd2.internode.on.net [150.101.116.94]) by smtp1.adl2.internode.on.net (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i3A9xQeZ026073; Sat, 10 Apr 2004 19:29:43 +0930 (CST) Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Dynamically evaluating OCaml code From: skaller Reply-To: skaller@users.sourceforge.net To: Markus Mottl Cc: skaller , Ocaml Mailing List In-Reply-To: <20040409083619.GA443@fichte.ai.univie.ac.at> References: <20020104004356.GA1672@mev> <20040408133727.GC29195@excelhustler.com> <20040408145606.GA18473@fichte.ai.univie.ac.at> <20040408153056.GB30763@excelhustler.com> <20040408164404.GA19556@fichte.ai.univie.ac.at> <1081491825.20677.89.camel@pelican> <20040409083619.GA443@fichte.ai.univie.ac.at> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1081591164.20677.241.camel@pelican> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2 (1.2.2-4) Date: 10 Apr 2004 19:59:25 +1000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Miltered: at concorde by Joe's j-chkmail ("http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr")! X-Loop: caml-list@inria.fr X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 dynamically:01 sourceforge:01 2004:99 lgpled:01 licenced:01 lgpled:01 distro:01 ffau:99 lgpl:01 pcre:01 distro:01 expressing:01 9660:01 glebe:01 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 226 On Fri, 2004-04-09 at 18:36, Markus Mottl wrote: > I'd say it depends on the way you distribute things. You may well use > an LGPLed library in a BSD licenced product - at least I don't see any > problem here. However, what you cannot do is that you modify the LGPLed > source and put the result under a BSD licence. So what's the problem > you have? The whole of my distro consists of literate programmed sources under a single licence. If I consider you an unstable/unreliable source, I have to physically include your sources with mine in a wrapped up form. I simply cannot require my clients require their clients require downloading and installing 20 different third party Ocaml/C packages just to get the Felix *compiler* to work, or spend week analysing my code to decide which parts are FFAU and which LGPL. Stick PCRE in the standard Ocaml distro and the problem goes away entirely. Hmm. Perhaps this is one way of expressing it: My product is part of the Bazaar but it has pretensions of being its own Cathedral and so can't depend on the rest of the Bazaar, only on other Cathedrals. Arms length is OK. Two arms length is not :) -- John Skaller, mailto:skaller@users.sf.net voice: 061-2-9660-0850, snail: PO BOX 401 Glebe NSW 2037 Australia Checkout the Felix programming language http://felix.sf.net ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners