From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10EF2BC6C for ; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 20:26:44 +0100 (CET) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgAAAFsMn0eAArkpjGdsb2JhbACBWI5NAQEBCAQGCQYannY X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,271,1199660400"; d="scan'208";a="8510373" Received: from chokecherry.srv.cs.cmu.edu ([128.2.185.41]) by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 29 Jan 2008 20:26:43 +0100 Received: from stratocaster.home (c-24-3-147-134.hsd1.pa.comcast.net [24.3.147.134]) (authenticated bits=0) by chokecherry.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id m0TJQf9J028379 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 14:26:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from ecc by stratocaster.home with local (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1JJw6T-0006FB-CX for caml-list@yquem.inria.fr; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 14:26:41 -0500 Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 14:26:41 -0500 From: Eric Cooper To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] [OSR] Suggested Topic - License Message-ID: <20080129192641.GA19529@stratocaster.home> Mail-Followup-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr References: <5389061B65D50446B1783B97DFDB392D0894F5AE@orsmsx411.amr.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5389061B65D50446B1783B97DFDB392D0894F5AE@orsmsx411.amr.corp.intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17+20080114 (2008-01-14) X-Spam: no; 0.00; redistribute:01 authors':01 strawman:01 wikis:01 discusion:98 wrote:01 caml-list:01 caml:02 archives:02 authors:03 external:03 library:03 library:03 debian:04 debian:04 On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 10:17:10AM -0800, Grundy, Jim D wrote: > One issue to be considered in a an external library standardization > process is the license under which libraries accepted to the standard > are made available. This is the prerogative of the library author(s), not the distribution. The distribution might only accept and redistribute software with a given license (a very bad idea, IMO), or suggest a license to those authors who are on the fence, but in the end it's the authors' choice. And you can't reasonably expect an outside author to care about providing preferential licensing to members of the Caml Consortium. As a strawman, I'd suggest following the Debian Free Software Guidelines ( http://www.debian.org/social_contract#guidelines ) A final comment: I think (specialized) mailing lists, with archives, are better for these kinds of discusion than Wikis. -- Eric Cooper e c c @ c m u . e d u