Re: [Caml-list] ocaml compiler license

["Milan Stanojević" <milanst@gmail.com>]

On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 6:28 PM, Fabrice Le Fessant
<Fabrice.Le_fessant@inria.fr> wrote:
> From the QPL 1.0 license in OCaml sources:
>
> "... distribute your modifications, in a form that is separate from
> the Software, such as patches."
>
> In GIT, the software itself is a set of patches, so it's not so clear
> for me that if the modifications are another set of patches, there are
> in a "separate form".

I thought that the intent was to make sure that modified software
can't be mistaken for original one, hence "separate form".

But, reading here
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html

"Q Public License (QPL), Version 1.0 (#QPL)

This is a non-copyleft free software license which is incompatible
with the GNU GPL. It also causes major practical inconvenience,
because modified sources can only be distributed as patches."

This seems like a much stronger reading.

Maybe INRIA is willing to amend the license to explicitly allow any
form of redistribution, not only patches.