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 KAA07240; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 10:28:18 +0100 (MET) 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 KAA07147 for ; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 10:28:17 +0100 (MET) Received: from dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr (dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr [130.79.44.193]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.10.0) with ESMTP id fA99SGj25784 for ; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 10:28:16 +0100 (MET) Received: (from luther@localhost) by dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA08799; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 10:27:05 +0100 Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 10:27:05 +0100 From: Sven To: Patrick M Doane Cc: Michael Welsh Duggan , Caml-list Subject: Re: [Caml-list] License Conditions for OCaml Message-ID: <20011109102705.C8267@dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr> References: <20011109005743.K73712-100000@fledge.watson.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0.1i In-Reply-To: <20011109005743.K73712-100000@fledge.watson.org>; from patrick@watson.org on Fri, Nov 09, 2001 at 12:58:30AM -0500 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk On Fri, Nov 09, 2001 at 12:58:30AM -0500, Patrick M Doane wrote: > On Fri, 9 Nov 2001, Michael Welsh Duggan wrote: > > > Patrick M Doane 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). But apparently without reading it indepth, or at least understanding what it trully says. Friendly, Sven Luther ------------------- 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