Re: [Caml-list] ocamlbuild on Windows and bash vs. cmd

[Anil Madhavapeddy <anil@recoil.org>]

The standard MirageOS license for our libraries is ISC, which is short and simple (and the standard license used for new code in OpenBSD):

https://github.com/mirage/mirage/blob/master/LICENSE.md

regards,
Anil

> On 11 Oct 2016, at 14:00, Ivan Gotovchits <ivg@ieee.org> wrote:
> 
> Hi Yaron,
> 
> Given that most of the Janestreet codebase is developed in-house, it might be not that hard to relicense it. This is especially true for `shexp` that currently 
> has only one contributor. I would suggest switching to ISC or MIT (aka X11, aka Expat) licenses. Probably the former should be preferred, as it is shorter and cleaner. 
> The full list of licenses compatible with GPL is here [1].
> 
> Regards,
> Ivan
> 
> [1]: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html
> 
> On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 8:36 AM, Yaron Minsky <yminsky@janestreet.com> wrote:
> You have got to be kidding me.
> 
> Maybe we can dual license? It would be lovely to avoid the rewrite.
> What license would be adequate? Maybe we can license everything under
> LGPLv2+exception and Apache?
> 
> I hate licenses.
> 
> y
> 
> On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 7:49 AM, Soegtrop, Michael
> <michael.soegtrop@intel.com> wrote:
> > Dear Yaron,
> >
> >
> >
> >> I very much hope the licensing isn't an issue. We purposely picked a very
> >> liberal license to make this kind of thing as easy as possible. Do tell us
> >> if you find an issue there.
> >
> >
> >
> > it is hard to believe, but the licensing is an issue. According to this
> > reference from Apache:
> >
> >
> >
> > https://www.apache.org/licenses/GPL-compatibility.html
> >
> >
> >
> > citation:
> >
> >
> >
> > “Despite our best efforts, the FSF has never considered the Apache License
> > to be compatible with GPL version 2, citing the patent termination and
> > indemnification provisions as restrictions not present in the older GPL
> > license.”
> >
> >
> >
> > the apache license you use is not compatible with GPL2. Since the OCaml
> > library is LGPL 2.1, it cannot include Apache licensed code. The patent
> > issue mentioned above has nothing to do with the difference between GPL and
> > LGPL, so my guess would be that this also applies to LGPL 2.X.
> >
> >
> >
> > Please note that the above reference states that Apache is compatible with
> > GPL 3, but I guess you can write a PhD thesis in law and/or computer science
> > about the topic if it is better to have GPL 2.x+ or GPL 3+Apache.
> >
> >
> >
> > If you think it is worthwhile, I can ask one of our open source lawyers for
> > advice, but I think the above statement from Apache is fairly clear.
> >
> >
> >
> > So as it looks, I have to rewrite from scratch what I need - sigh
> >
> >
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> >
> >
> > Michael
> >
> > Intel Deutschland GmbH
> > Registered Address: Am Campeon 10-12, 85579 Neubiberg, Germany
> > Tel: +49 89 99 8853-0, www.intel.de
> > Managing Directors: Christin Eisenschmid, Christian Lamprechter
> > Chairperson of the Supervisory Board: Nicole Lau
> > Registered Office: Munich
> > Commercial Register: Amtsgericht Muenchen HRB 186928
> 
> --
> Caml-list mailing list.  Subscription management and archives:
> https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/arc/caml-list
> Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners
> Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs
>