Mailing list for all users of the OCaml language and system.
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Edgar Friendly <thelema314@gmail.com>
To: Jon Harrop <jon@ffconsultancy.com>
Cc: caml-list@inria.fr
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Relicensing OCaml
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 12:23:46 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <47A0C0B2.1010101@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200801301326.04506.jon@ffconsultancy.com>

Jon Harrop wrote:
> I just ploughed through the CAML Consortium legal document to find out what a 
> consortium member can do and was quite surprised to find (p. 13) that they 
> are able to redistribute under any license of their choosing.
> 
> So any of the Consortium members can simply republish the core OCaml 
> distribution under LGPL, BSD or whatever and then we can get on with 
> improving it and not having to worry about patches and backward 
> compatibility... :-)
> 

I recall reading a discussion where Xavier(?) admitted that yes, a
consortium member *could* do this, but their membership in the
consortium would expire after a year and they would not get the chance
to renew.

Imagine a future where INRIA releases nothing further OCaml-related and
drops all support for it.  The community *might* continue OCaml's
existence.  We'll increase the size and scope of the stdlib without
problem.  We'll include simple changes to the compiler like try..finally
syntax.  We'll give the toplevel line-editing capabilities.

But will the community implement dynamic loading of native code?  How
long will it take the community to build an ARM port? Ask yourself where
99% of the knowledge of OCaml's internals lies.  Ask yourself who can
best find and fix corner-case bugs in the type system.

INRIA has to maintain copyright on something whole and usable to keep
the Consortium going.  If Community-OCaml changes the compiler or
stdlib, Consortium members won't have the same rights to those
improvements as they do to INRIA's code.  The easy solution seems to be
giving copyright of contributed code to INRIA so they stay in complete
control over the compiler.  Even if people would do this, INRIA seems
unwilling to test French copyright law on this matter, so we're stuck there.

I know that Xavier has "given an inch" in at least verbally allowing a
Community distribution of OCaml that can include additional libraries
and camlp4 filters.  Please don't try to "take a mile" and insist that
everything get opened up to community development right now.  Let's get
Community-OCaml up and running and see where things go after a release
or two of that.

E


      reply	other threads:[~2008-01-30 18:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-01-30 13:26 Jon Harrop
2008-01-30 18:23 ` Edgar Friendly [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=47A0C0B2.1010101@gmail.com \
    --to=thelema314@gmail.com \
    --cc=caml-list@inria.fr \
    --cc=jon@ffconsultancy.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox