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 88DC97EEE0 for ; Fri, 6 Mar 2015 08:41:14 +0100 (CET) Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of adrien@notk.org) identity=pra; client-ip=91.121.71.147; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="adrien@notk.org"; x-sender="adrien@notk.org"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: Pass (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: domain of adrien@notk.org designates 91.121.71.147 as permitted sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=91.121.71.147; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="adrien@notk.org"; x-sender="adrien@notk.org"; 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@nautica.notk.org) identity=helo; client-ip=91.121.71.147; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="adrien@notk.org"; x-sender="postmaster@nautica.notk.org"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0CLBgAoWflU/5NHeVtcgwZSWoMKvjuFcAKBNk0BAQEBAQF8hBABBSMPAUYQCxgCAgUTDgICDwUYMROIMwm3eppiAQEBAQEFAQEBAQEBARcEgSGJdoRuB4JoL4EUBZlTAYEajxODQiOCAhyBUT0xAYJCAQEB X-IPAS-Result: A0CLBgAoWflU/5NHeVtcgwZSWoMKvjuFcAKBNk0BAQEBAQF8hBABBSMPAUYQCxgCAgUTDgICDwUYMROIMwm3eppiAQEBAQEFAQEBAQEBARcEgSGJdoRuB4JoL4EUBZlTAYEajxODQiOCAhyBUT0xAYJCAQEB X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.11,351,1422918000"; d="scan'208";a="102315479" Received: from nautica.notk.org ([91.121.71.147]) by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/ADH-AES256-SHA; 06 Mar 2015 08:41:13 +0100 Received: by nautica.notk.org (Postfix, from userid 1003) id A3AC2C009; Fri, 6 Mar 2015 08:41:12 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 08:41:12 +0100 From: Adrien Nader To: Milan =?utf-8?Q?Stanojevi=C4=87?= Cc: Fabrice Le Fessant , David Allsopp , Alexey Egorov , "caml-list@inria.fr" Message-ID: <20150306074112.GA21637@notk.org> References: <1425577100.968957623@f83.i.mail.ru> <20150305194136.GA31199@notk.org> <1425585056.666752588@f303.i.mail.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Subject: Re: [Caml-list] ocaml compiler license On Thu, Mar 05, 2015, Milan Stanojević wrote: > On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 6:28 PM, Fabrice Le Fessant > wrote: > > From the QPL 1.0 license in OCaml sources: > > > > "... distribute your modifications, in a form that is separate from > > the Software, such as patches." > > > > In GIT, the software itself is a set of patches, so it's not so clear > > for me that if the modifications are another set of patches, there are > > in a "separate form". > > I thought that the intent was to make sure that modified software > can't be mistaken for original one, hence "separate form". > > But, reading here > https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html > > "Q Public License (QPL), Version 1.0 (#QPL) > > This is a non-copyleft free software license which is incompatible > with the GNU GPL. It also causes major practical inconvenience, > because modified sources can only be distributed as patches." > > This seems like a much stronger reading. > > Maybe INRIA is willing to amend the license to explicitly allow any > form of redistribution, not only patches. GNU is a bit biaised here and the "license-list" page is short and (mostly) to the point: it covers a large number of licenses and doesn't use many words for each to keep the length sane. It's not the first time this question has been raised so maybe it would be worth adding a sentence about that. (that said I'm under the impression that you can't change the wording of the QPL by copyright but I can't check that since the trolltech website seems down and I don't have time to search for a copy of the license elsewhere). -- Adrien Nader