Inspect libary

Inspect libary

[Kaspar Rohrer]

Hi everybody

Thanks for all the feedback and suggestions regarding hosting and licensing of my little library. I think I will host the code on github, because I really like the clean and shiny UI.
As for the license, I'm strongly favoring the LGPL license ATM, but I am unsure whether I should go with version 2.1 or 3.0. And whether or not I need to add a linking exception. Any opinions on that?

I'm currently documenting the source code and should be ready to release this evening.

Thanks
	Kaspar Rohrer

PS: Does somebody know why all of my browsers (Firefox, Safari, Camino on OS X 10.6) do not recognize the Forge.ocamlcore.org server certificate?

Re: [Caml-list] Inspect libary

[Vincent Aravantinos]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 341 bytes --]


Le 15 avr. 10 à 12:42, Kaspar Rohrer a écrit :

> PS: Does somebody know why all of my browsers (Firefox, Safari,  
> Camino on OS X 10.6) do not recognize the Forge.ocamlcore.org server  
> certificate?

I guess it's the same cause as this bug:

http://forge.ocamlcore.org/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=452&group_id=1&atid=101

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1348 bytes --]

Re: Inspect libary

[Sylvain Le Gall]

On 15-04-2010, Vincent Aravantinos <vincent.aravantinos@gmail.com> wrote:
> Le 15 avr. 10 =E0 12:42, Kaspar Rohrer a =E9crit :
>
>> PS: Does somebody know why all of my browsers (Firefox, Safari, =20
>> Camino on OS X 10.6) do not recognize the Forge.ocamlcore.org server =20=
>
>> certificate?
>
> I guess it's the same cause as this bug:
>
> http://forge.ocamlcore.org/tracker/index.php?func=3Ddetail&aid=3D452&group=_id=3D1&atid=3D101=
>

This is not about this bug. The server certificate has been issued by 
http://www.cacert.org

If you add their root certificate, the certificate of
forge.ocamlcore.org will be recognized.
http://www.cacert.org/index.php?id=3

This is done by default on Debian for example.

Regards,
Sylvain Le Gall

Re: [Caml-list] Inspect libary

[Ashish Agarwal]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1475 bytes --]

Regarding LGPL 2.1 versus 3.0, I recently tried finding the linking
exception for 3.0 but concluded that no one has written it yet (from
postings to the OCaml list, beginners list, and contacting the FSF). So if
you're going to include the linking exception, which most LGPL'd ocaml
libraries do, and you don't want to write the linking exception yourself,
then your only choice is 2.1.


On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 6:42 AM, Kaspar Rohrer <kaspar.rohrer@gmail.com>wrote:

> Hi everybody
>
> Thanks for all the feedback and suggestions regarding hosting and licensing
> of my little library. I think I will host the code on github, because I
> really like the clean and shiny UI.
> As for the license, I'm strongly favoring the LGPL license ATM, but I am
> unsure whether I should go with version 2.1 or 3.0. And whether or not I
> need to add a linking exception. Any opinions on that?
>
> I'm currently documenting the source code and should be ready to release
> this evening.
>
> Thanks
>         Kaspar Rohrer
>
> PS: Does somebody know why all of my browsers (Firefox, Safari, Camino on
> OS X 10.6) do not recognize the Forge.ocamlcore.org server certificate?
>
> _______________________________________________
> Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management:
> http://yquem.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/caml-list
> Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
> Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners
> Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2207 bytes --]