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 KAA21310; Mon, 24 Feb 2003 10:19:03 +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 KAA21462 for ; Mon, 24 Feb 2003 10:18:54 +0100 (MET) Received: from mel-rto3.wanadoo.fr (smtp-out-3.wanadoo.fr [193.252.19.233]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id h1O9IsT03621 for ; Mon, 24 Feb 2003 10:18:54 +0100 (MET) Received: from mel-rta8.wanadoo.fr (193.252.19.79) by mel-rto3.wanadoo.fr (6.7.015) id 3E0C33B502507B01; Mon, 24 Feb 2003 10:18:45 +0100 Received: from iliana (80.11.160.88) by mel-rta8.wanadoo.fr (6.7.015) id 3E26DA700157093F; Mon, 24 Feb 2003 10:18:45 +0100 Received: from luther by iliana with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18nEl2-0000Oh-00; Mon, 24 Feb 2003 10:18:44 +0100 Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 10:18:43 +0100 To: Brian Hurt Cc: Sven Luther , Ocaml Mailing List Subject: Re: [Caml-list] User library license Message-ID: <20030224091843.GA826@iliana> References: <20030223170018.GA1456@iliana> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.3i From: Sven Luther Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk On Sun, Feb 23, 2003 at 01:57:20PM -0600, Brian Hurt wrote: > On Sun, 23 Feb 2003, Sven Luther wrote: > > > The best idea is to use the same licence the ocaml runtime currently > > uses : > > This is by far the best idea. This means we don't have to relicense the > software to move it between the user library and the standard library. > Relicensing is a bitch, to put it simply. If the two licenses are > congruent from day one, no relicensing is needed (and moving code is loads > easier). :))) > > The Library is distributed under the terms of the GNU Library General > > Public License version 2 (found in /usr/share/common-licenses/LGPL-2 > > on debian systems). > > > > This argument would have convinced me to use a different license thant he > LGPL. Huh ??? I just copied the licence from my debian package, i guess the important part is the second paragraph. There was a huge discution about it here, and even RMS gave its input and approval. Just check the mail archive of it to see the argument, and maybe a reply from me to RMS where the problem was resumed. Friendly, Sven Luther ------------------- 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