Re: [Caml-list] License Conditions for OCaml

[Patrick M Doane <patrick@watson.org>]

On Fri, 9 Nov 2001, Michael Welsh Duggan wrote:

> Patrick M Doane <patrick@watson.org> writes:
>
> > OCaml doesn't provide support for shared libraries (although 3.03 does
> > provide some dynamic loading capabilities for bytecode only). So we
> > need to consider the portions of the license that apply for static
> > linking. The LGPL provides some rather contradictory statements in section
> > 6 regarding that:
> >
> >   1. you may also compile or link a "work that uses the Library" with the
> >      Library to produce a work containing portions of the Library, and
> >      distribute that work under terms of your choice, provided that the
> >      terms permit modification of the work for the customer's own use and
> >      reverse engineering for debugging such modifications.
> >
> > This clause is enough to throw out most commercial applications. It is
> > standard industry practice to disallow reverse engineering. Most software
> > companies are going to resist changing this - and for good reason too.
>
> That is section 1.  Section 6 begins, "as an exception to the
> Sections above"...

It's section 6. I extracted two sections from it (that I labeled 1 and 2).

-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs  FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr