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 AAA06893; Sat, 20 Sep 2003 00:29:35 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id AAA05613 for ; Sat, 20 Sep 2003 00:29:34 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from pecan.cc.columbia.edu (pecan.cc.columbia.edu [128.59.59.178]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id h8JMTXH05616 for ; Sat, 20 Sep 2003 00:29:33 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from tw304h3.cpmc.columbia.edu (tw304h3.cpmc.columbia.edu [156.111.84.180]) (user=ot14 mech=PLAIN bits=0) by pecan.cc.columbia.edu (8.12.10/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h8JMTMrE025330 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NOT); Fri, 19 Sep 2003 18:29:23 -0400 (EDT) From: Oleg Trott To: skaller@ozemail.com.au, Mattias Waldau Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Commercial application written in O'Caml: ExcelEverywhere Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 18:29:04 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.3 Cc: caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr References: <3F6AB7CB.6020505@abc.se> <1063969848.27470.42.camel@pelican> In-Reply-To: <1063969848.27470.42.camel@pelican> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200309191829.04642.oleg_trott@columbia.edu> X-No-Spam-Score: Local X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.35 X-Loop: caml-list@inria.fr X-Spam: no; 0.00; oleg:01 oleg:01 caml-list:01 lgpl:01 permissive:01 runtime:01 lgpl:01 runtime:01 open-source:01 ocaml:01 ocaml:01 linking:02 o'caml:02 licence:03 wrote:03 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk On Friday 19 September 2003 07:10 am, skaller wrote: > Agree. Too many LGPL contributions, which I can't > use in my open source project because it has a > public domain licence -- I *desire* to encourage > commercial use of my code: the more users the better. Does it make sense to give your library a license any more permissive than OCaml runtime (LGPL with static linking) ? Applications using your library will have to use OCaml runtime anyway. The difference comes up only when the user changes your library. On the other hand, having LGPL license may encourage open-source advocates to contribute. ------------------- 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/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners