Re: [Caml-list] We need a rich standard library distributed with OCaml, really

[Oliver Bandel <oliver@first.in-berlin.de>]

Zitat von Christophe Troestler <Christophe.Troestler@umons.ac.be>  
(Fri, 28 Aug 2015 14:08:26 +0200)

[...]
> 1. INTEROPERABILITY: While many, possibly overlapping, libraries may
[...]

[...]
> 2. LICENSES: Every opam package comes with a license which should  
> help companies to choose which ones to use.  For the problem Hongbo  
> mentioned, maybe one could develop a tool that does the following:
[...]


Possibly that's not a questio of a tool,
but rather a question of lawyers.

Are there already schemes / tables, that suggest what combinations
of licenses do fit, and which not?
And: the result may also be different, depending on the question
(which aspects of the problem of licenses is looked at).

So, I think a tool would be the step that comes after classification of the
problem.

[...]
> given a white-list of licenses that the company has agreed are OK  
> (e.g. ISC) and a list of opam packages, the tool would warn if any  
> of the (recursive) dependencies does not have a “good” license.
[...]



Also a "which license do I choose", or "what do I have to add"
(e.g. linking exception for OCaml and GPL-like licenses) would pop up.

=> which license can be used / derived for the project that someone  
wants to program,
    from those licenses that are available in the libs (which might  
have different licensing schemes)

So, thats the reverse question of "what libs can I chose to fit in license X".


So possible questions are:

  - what lib(s) can I use, which to fit into "I need license X for my program"
  - what license(s) can I chose for my program, if I use library Y




>
> 3. APPLICATION DOMAINS: A newcomer has to use resources like  
> https://github.com/rizo/awesome-ocaml/blob/master/sotu.md

Ah, didn't knew that.

More of "we have a lot of documents, cluttered through the web".

Also seems like some (a lot of?) entries are missing there...


Ciao,
    Oliver