From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5444BB91 for ; Fri, 28 Jan 2005 17:45:57 +0100 (CET) Received: from pauillac.inria.fr (pauillac.inria.fr [128.93.11.35]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j0SGjvG2019713 for ; Fri, 28 Jan 2005 17:45:57 +0100 Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id RAA12610 for ; Fri, 28 Jan 2005 17:45:56 +0100 (MET) Received: from osiris.uid0.sk (osiris.uid0.sk [62.168.97.100]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j0SGjuY7019708 for ; Fri, 28 Jan 2005 17:45:56 +0100 Received: from osiris.uid0.sk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nod32.uid0.sk (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDB9987C03D for ; Fri, 28 Jan 2005 17:47:44 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanner: This message was checked by NOD32 Antivirus system NOD32 for Linux Mail Server. For more information on NOD32 Antivirus System, please, visit our website: http://www.nod32.com/ Received: by osiris.uid0.sk (Postfix, from userid 1002) id D044D87C00C; Fri, 28 Jan 2005 17:47:44 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 17:47:44 +0100 From: Jozef Kosoru To: caml-list Subject: Ocaml license - why not GPL? Message-ID: <20050128164744.GG13718@osiris.uid0.sk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2i X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 41FA6C45.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 41FA6C44.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; ocaml:01 gpl:01 o'caml:01 compiler:01 gpl:01 compiler:01 lgpl:01 o'caml:01 ocaml:01 compile:01 compile:01 native:02 programming:03 executable:03 apps:04 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.0 (2004-09-13) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.0.0 X-Spam-Level: Hello, I would like to ask O'Caml developers why they have chosen QPL license for the compiler and GPL for libraries? Of course they have a full right to choose a license they want but I think that GPL for the compiler and LGPL for the libraries would be a much better choice. Now it is for example impossible to distribute an O'Caml package as a part of some O'Caml GPL project source package. Users have to know that this program is written in some unusual programming language and they have to download and compile the O'Campl compiler first. For them it would be much better to just download the application sources and type /configure; make; make install .and build process would compile the ocaml compiler (if it's not already present) and then compile application sources and install native executable (just like C/C++ apps). Best regards, Jozef -- jozef kosoru http://zyzstar.kosoru.com