From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AC11BC88 for ; Mon, 31 Jan 2005 08:47:17 +0100 (CET) Received: from pauillac.inria.fr (pauillac.inria.fr [128.93.11.35]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j0V7lGXX030383 for ; Mon, 31 Jan 2005 08:47:16 +0100 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 IAA21452 for ; Mon, 31 Jan 2005 08:47:16 +0100 (MET) Received: from alex.barettalocal.com (h213-255-109-130.albacom.net [213.255.109.130] (may be forged)) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j0V7lFeA007036 for ; Mon, 31 Jan 2005 08:47:15 +0100 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by alex.barettalocal.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5C282BB900; Mon, 31 Jan 2005 08:47:14 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <41FDE282.7040709@barettadeit.com> Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 08:47:14 +0100 From: Alex Baretta User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20050105 Debian/1.7.5-1 X-Accept-Language: it, en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Sven Luther , Ocaml Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Ocaml license - why not GPL? References: <20050128164744.GG13718@osiris.uid0.sk> <20050129.150538.78035843.garrigue@math.nagoya-u.ac.jp> <20050130062235.GC32348@pegasos> <20050131.095711.27629180.garrigue@math.nagoya-u.ac.jp> <41FDD853.5090801@barettadeit.com> <20050131073813.GC19902@pegasos> In-Reply-To: <20050131073813.GC19902@pegasos> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 41FDE284.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 41FDE283.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; baretta:01 caml-list:01 ocaml:01 gpl:01 sven:01 luther:01 wrote:01 baretta:01 wrote:01 hmmm:01 toplevel:01 compiler:01 toplevel:01 gpl:01 ocaml:01 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.1 required=5.0 tests=FORGED_RCVD_HELO autolearn=disabled version=3.0.2 X-Spam-Level: Sven Luther wrote: > On Mon, Jan 31, 2005 at 08:03:47AM +0100, Alex Baretta wrote: > >>Hmmm... This is an interesting point! The toplevel library includes the >>compiler code, which is licensed under the QPL, but yet somehow must be >>allowed to link to GPLed libraries and programs. If the toplevel library >> may not be linked with GPLed code, then the toplevel itself become >>hardly usable, and a significant portion of my code, which is GPLed and >>links the toplevel library, would be illegal. > > > Indeed. This bothers me quite a bit. Am I to expect a legal pursuit from INRIA for violating the QPL for having released mixed GPL+QPL code? Or am I to pursue myself because the QPL breaks my own GPLed code? >>Might the caml breeders please comment on this issue? I would really appreciate an official response from the INRIA people. I think Ocaml is a great tool for commercial free software development, but in order to be able to build a thriving business I must make sure that Xavier et al. won't meet me with a team of Dobermans to settle copyright issues... Alex -- ********************************************************************* http://www.barettadeit.com/ Baretta DE&IT A division of Baretta SRL tel. +39 02 370 111 55 fax. +39 02 370 111 54 Our technology: The Application System/Xcaml (AS/Xcaml) The FreerP Project