From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104]) by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1E9577EE51 for ; Wed, 22 May 2013 18:40:52 +0200 (CEST) Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of marek@xivilization.net) identity=pra; client-ip=178.63.18.39; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="marek@xivilization.net"; x-sender="marek@xivilization.net"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: Pass (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: domain of marek@xivilization.net designates 178.63.18.39 as permitted sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=178.63.18.39; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="marek@xivilization.net"; x-sender="marek@xivilization.net"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1" Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of postmaster@coaxial.xivilization.net) identity=helo; client-ip=178.63.18.39; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="marek@xivilization.net"; x-sender="postmaster@coaxial.xivilization.net"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AnEFAEz0nFGyPxIn/2dsb2JhbABagwiDJL56gQYWdIIjAQEEAToGAQE4BAsLISUPSBmIBwqoL4Q+AQV+jSYGjyQWgz6XOpFBgxE X-IPAS-Result: AnEFAEz0nFGyPxIn/2dsb2JhbABagwiDJL56gQYWdIIjAQEEAToGAQE4BAsLISUPSBmIBwqoL4Q+AQV+jSYGjyQWgz6XOpFBgxE X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,722,1363129200"; d="scan'208";a="15323574" Received: from coaxial.xivilization.net ([178.63.18.39]) by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA; 22 May 2013 18:40:51 +0200 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=xivilization.net; s=xiv; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Mime-Version:References:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:Subject:To:From:Date; bh=xQ9V6XdJiTFA2ZtGXHsiIe0Jjf50LE7gZt39Uv6ep7M=; b=Ip/OdxTzrapJ0/zT4NYX1zHKT4IXU6s5UjGl4ZGHXysWhNwGskfNCB2p39jc1W7Fniga/2m8psdne6JO1QUZhYsH7v+5CSEFwocm2qHGgpKZta+LhybOqJy18OXfPFO2; Received: from ppp-188-174-103-112.dynamic.mnet-online.de ([188.174.103.112] helo=localhost.localdomain) by coaxial.xivilization.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1UfC5q-0006gG-UH for caml-list@inria.fr; Wed, 22 May 2013 18:40:51 +0200 Date: Wed, 22 May 2013 18:40:49 +0200 From: Marek Kubica To: caml-list@inria.fr Message-ID: <20130522184049.4aefde24@xivilization.net> In-Reply-To: References: <20130522123427.GA1894@siouxsie> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.9.1 (GTK+ 2.24.18; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Licenses - Confusion On Wed, 22 May 2013 13:39:29 +0100 Anil Madhavapeddy wrote: > The last time I spoke to a lawyer about the LGPL+exception (back in > 2008 in Xensource), there were alarm bells raised about the shoddy > legal wording involved. A BSD-style license is significantly > simpler, as long as it doesn't include the advertising clause. But it is also a completely different, non-copyleft license so it wouldn't serve the same purpose. regards, Marek