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 35829BC8A for ; Sun, 30 Jan 2005 07:21:44 +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 j0U6Lh9q021635 for ; Sun, 30 Jan 2005 07:21:43 +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 HAA06645 for ; Sun, 30 Jan 2005 07:21:43 +0100 (MET) Received: from smtp8.wanadoo.fr (smtp8.wanadoo.fr [193.252.22.23]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j0U6LgcK021632 for ; Sun, 30 Jan 2005 07:21:43 +0100 Received: from me-wanadoo.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mwinf0806.wanadoo.fr (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id DA5F61C0008B; Sun, 30 Jan 2005 07:21:42 +0100 (CET) Received: from pegasos (AStrasbourg-251-1-65-234.w82-126.abo.wanadoo.fr [82.126.133.234]) by mwinf0806.wanadoo.fr (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id B955D1C00086; Sun, 30 Jan 2005 07:21:42 +0100 (CET) X-ME-UUID: 20050130062142759.B955D1C00086@mwinf0806.wanadoo.fr Received: from luther by pegasos with local (Exim 4.43) id 1Cv8Q6-0008Tb-OO; Sun, 30 Jan 2005 07:18:50 +0100 Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 07:18:46 +0100 To: Jozef Kosoru Cc: caml-list Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Ocaml license - why not GPL? Message-ID: <20050130061846.GB32348@pegasos> References: <20050128164744.GG13718@osiris.uid0.sk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050128164744.GG13718@osiris.uid0.sk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040907i From: Sven Luther X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 41FC7CF7.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 41FC7CF7.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 ocaml:01 gpl:01 sven:01 luther:01 sven:01 luther:01 wrote:01 o'caml:01 compiler:01 gpl:01 compiler:01 lgpl:01 o'caml:01 ocaml:01 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: On Fri, Jan 28, 2005 at 05:47:44PM +0100, Jozef Kosoru wrote: > 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). Jozef, With the current licence, which is not strictly the QPL anymore, please read it, it is perfectly acceptable to distribute ocaml into debian/main, so i doubt there is any additional restriction you may have for whatever obscure need you may have. The only real problem is if you want to link your stuff with the ocaml compiler pseudo-QPLed code. But mere agregation, even if it is Makefile enabled, do not cause the GPL/QPL incompatibility to come to life, only true linking. And anyway, real OSes have ocaml packages :) Friendly, Sven Luther