From: skaller <skaller@users.sourceforge.net>
To: Zheng Li <li@pps.jussieu.fr>
Cc: caml-list@inria.fr
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Re: [ANN] coThreads 0.10
Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2007 20:43:09 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1190284989.6770.28.camel@rosella.wigram> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87abrhka16.fsf@pps.jussieu.fr>
On Thu, 2007-09-20 at 10:37 +0200, Zheng Li wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Erik de Castro Lopo <mle+ocaml@mega-nerd.com> writes:
> > skaller wrote:
> >> CoThreads is GPL, not even LGPL, let alone LGPL with linking exception,
> > I posted a request to the CoThreads mailing list for a licence change
> > to LGPL with linking exception.
>
> Yes. I have no problem to change the licence to another one if desired by the
> community. I can change it since next release. Is LGPL+linking exception the
> right one?
It depends how restrictive you *intend* to be. BSD, MIT, Boost,
Creative Commons, etc are for genuinely free software.
Free as in FFAU: Free for Any Use. Do what you like with it!
GPL is if you want to prevent anyone using it who hides any
source code (most commercial use).
LGPL+linking X is when you don't mind if people hide
their own source, as long as they don't hide yours.
My opinion is: for a MAJOR public executable like gcc,
GPL is OK. For major libraries like glibc, LGPL (with
linking permitted) would be ok.
For code which has hardly any developers or users, if you
wish to encourage the widest possible use, the most
permissive licence (eg BSD) is probably the best:
why exclude potential users who may help with bug reports
or patches? IMHO *especially* commercial users who put funds
into it and make a commitment, are even more likely to help
with maintenance and development.
Unless or until you expect to actually make money out of the
code itself, restrictive licences are counter-productive ..
in my opinion of course.
EG: GHC Haskell is currently trying to dump GMP because
of the licence. GMP is LGPL, GHC is BSD: dependence on GMP
is therefore a serious barrier to people using Haskell in
industry.. not what the authors want. (Plain LGPL doesn't
have a static linking exception as Ocaml's libraries do).
Another *famous* example is 'readline()', the code that
does line editing for bash. Why is Ocaml's top level
so crappy, with no editing? Because of readline()'s GPL
licence it can't be used, because GPL is a virus, it
propagates to anything it touches.
--
John Skaller <skaller at users dot sf dot net>
Felix, successor to C++: http://felix.sf.net
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-09-20 10:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-09-17 16:31 Zheng Li
2007-09-17 16:48 ` Zheng Li
2007-09-17 17:39 ` [Caml-list] " skaller
2007-09-17 17:51 ` Zheng Li
2007-09-17 21:33 ` [Caml-list] " skaller
2007-09-17 22:37 ` Zheng Li
2007-09-17 23:26 ` [Caml-list] " skaller
2007-09-18 0:16 ` Zheng Li
2007-09-18 0:53 ` [Caml-list] " Erik de Castro Lopo
2007-09-18 1:25 ` Erik de Castro Lopo
2007-09-18 4:29 ` skaller
2007-09-19 10:11 ` Erik de Castro Lopo
2007-09-19 10:58 ` Can coThreads be used for message passing architecture? Jan Kybic
2007-09-19 11:13 ` [Caml-list] " Erik de Castro Lopo
2007-09-19 12:59 ` Zheng Li
2007-09-20 4:16 ` [Caml-list] " Jon Harrop
2007-09-20 6:11 ` Erik de Castro Lopo
2007-09-20 9:06 ` Zheng Li
2007-09-20 8:49 ` Zheng Li
2007-09-19 19:13 ` [Caml-list] Re: [ANN] coThreads 0.10 Vu Ngoc San
2007-09-19 20:10 ` Zheng Li
2007-09-20 0:50 ` [Caml-list] " skaller
2007-09-20 4:29 ` Erik de Castro Lopo
2007-09-20 7:11 ` skaller
2007-09-20 7:52 ` Erik de Castro Lopo
2007-09-20 8:37 ` Zheng Li
2007-09-20 10:43 ` skaller [this message]
2007-09-20 10:44 ` [Caml-list] " Matthew Hannigan
2007-09-20 15:02 ` skaller
2007-09-20 15:07 ` Christophe Raffalli
2007-09-20 15:51 ` skaller
2007-09-20 16:26 ` Florian Weimer
2007-09-20 17:37 ` Vincent Aravantinos
2007-09-21 16:33 ` readline license (was: [ANN] coThreads 0.10) Xavier Leroy
2007-09-21 17:11 ` [Caml-list] " Matthew William Cox
2007-09-21 18:05 ` skaller
2007-09-21 21:51 ` [Caml-list] Re: readline license Markus E L
2007-09-21 22:16 ` Daniel Bünzli
2007-09-22 0:49 ` [Caml-list] Re: readline license (was: [ANN] coThreads 0.10) Matthew Hannigan
2007-09-20 11:39 ` [Caml-list] Re: [ANN] coThreads 0.10 Florian Weimer
2007-09-20 15:46 ` skaller
2007-09-20 18:14 ` Ken Rose
2007-09-20 8:31 ` Zheng Li
2007-09-20 8:18 ` Zheng Li
2007-09-18 2:10 ` [Caml-list] " Erik de Castro Lopo
2007-09-18 5:59 ` skaller
2007-09-18 6:23 ` Erik de Castro Lopo
2007-09-18 9:01 ` Zheng Li
2007-09-18 13:40 ` Zheng Li
2007-09-18 23:53 ` [Caml-list] " Erik de Castro Lopo
2007-09-18 9:09 ` [Caml-list] " skaller
2007-09-18 13:03 ` Markus E L
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1190284989.6770.28.camel@rosella.wigram \
--to=skaller@users.sourceforge.net \
--cc=caml-list@inria.fr \
--cc=li@pps.jussieu.fr \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox