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 QAA18438; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 16:59:34 +0100 (MET) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f 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 QAA17790 for ; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 16:59:32 +0100 (MET) Received: from mrwall.kal.com (mrwall.kal.com [194.193.14.236]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.10.0) with SMTP id fA9FxV511959 for ; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 16:59:32 +0100 (MET) Received: from mrwall.kal.com [194.193.14.236] (HELO localhost) by mrwall.kal.com (AltaVista Mail V2.0J/2.0J BL25J listener) id 0000_0045_3beb_fe3b_2a42; Fri, 09 Nov 2001 16:03:07 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Subject: RE: [Caml-list] License Conditions for OCaml Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.4417.0 content-class: urn:content-classes:message Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 15:55:40 -0000 Message-ID: <8E31D6933A2FE64F8AE3CC1381EEDCE71817B6@NT.kal.com> Thread-Topic: [Caml-list] License Conditions for OCaml Thread-Index: AcFpNTLpIXtdxdasQyutUZjyh6M1/gAASp8A From: "Dave Berry" To: "Patrick M Doane" , "Julian Assange" Cc: "Sven" , "Michael Welsh Duggan" , "Caml-list" Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk I believe the intent of the section of the LGPL that Patrick is quoting is to prevent unscrupulous people from incorporating an LGPL'd library into a library of their own and distributing it free from the terms of the LGPL. Clearly this scenario would be a way of breaking the intent of the licence. I don't believe this section is intended to cover applications. Why does intent matter? Three reasons: 1. The issue of morality. 2. The likelihood (or otherwise) of the FSF to sue. 3. Possibly even law, in some countries. The underlying problem is that the LGPL is designed for dynamically-linked libraries, and O'Caml is statically linked. It's a square peg and a round hole. IM(limited)O, the best way to fix it is to make OCaml use dynamic linking. Dave. -----Original Message----- From: Patrick M Doane [mailto:patrick@watson.org] Sent: 09 November 2001 15:40 To: Julian Assange Cc: Sven; Michael Welsh Duggan; Caml-list Subject: Re: [Caml-list] License Conditions for OCaml On Fri, 9 Nov 2001, Julian Assange wrote: > > All this legalise is very interesting, but in the end, as with all legalise > there is only one important issue: > > a) Who has the motivation, resources and standing to fuck with you? > > Hint: it's not INRIA. The issue of morality is very important to me and cannot be ignored. Besides, the FSF has plenty of motivation and resources. ------------------- Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ 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/ To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr