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 PAA24978; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 15:55:04 +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 PAA24710 for ; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 15:55:03 +0100 (MET) Received: from pauillac.inria.fr (pauillac.inria.fr [128.93.11.35]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id i0LEsrP20697; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 15:54:53 +0100 (MET) Received: from tintin.inria.fr (tintin.inria.fr [128.93.24.126]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with SMTP id PAA24814; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 15:54:52 +0100 (MET) Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 15:54:52 +0100 From: Maxence Guesdon To: Sven Luther Cc: skaller@tpg.com.au, erayo@cs.bilkent.edu.tr, caml-list Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Caml-get 0.1 Message-Id: <20040121155452.459de8f0.maxence.guesdon@inria.fr> In-Reply-To: <20040121143535.GA6935@iliana> References: <20040118174243.555a256e@haddock.max.fr> <1074561310.25914.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> <200401200437.30107.exa@kablonet.com.tr> <20040120111253.3e81ee04.maxence.guesdon@inria.fr> <1074693590.11497.16.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20040121151833.67a29f5c.maxence.guesdon@inria.fr> <20040121143535.GA6935@iliana> Organization: INRIA X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.6claws (GTK+ 1.2.10; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Loop: caml-list@inria.fr X-Spam: no; 0.00; maxence:01 guesdon:01 maxence:01 guesdon:01 caml-list:01 licence:03 source:07 friendly:10 license:10 license:10 distribute:10 licences:10 element:11 element:11 wrong:12 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk > > That's what I was thinking about: the mandatory license tag could > > take an url and the license would be retrieved from that url when > > the caml-get archive is retrieved. If a license could not be > > retrieved (because of a wrong url for example), the element would > > not be available in the client repository. > > Notice that many licences mandate that either the full licence or a > reduced version is available together with the source you distribute. Would it be ok it the license was put in the client repository and printed with the code when the (for example) -l option is given ? (By default the complete license information would not be printed with the code, only the url where to find it.) This way the license is available but not always added to your file when you want to use an element of the repository in your code. Friendly, Maxece ------------------- 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