Re: [Caml-list] Ocaml license - why not GPL?

[David Brown <caml-list@davidb.org>]

On Fri, Jan 28, 2005 at 05:47:44PM +0100, Jozef Kosoru wrote:

> 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).

I'm not exactly sure what your question is, but there is nothing about the
QPL or GPL that would forbid you from distributing the sources of the ocaml
compiler with another product.  Both licenses would allow this.  The only
thing that would be restricted would be if your program links with or uses
parts of the compiler itself.

Also, the ocaml library contains an exception that allows linking with
non-GPL programs, and is fairly liberal.

Dave