From: Brian Rogoff <bpr@best.com>
To: Dave Berry <Dave@kal.com>
Cc: Sven LUTHER <luther@dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr>,
reig@dcs.gla.ac.uk, caml-list@inria.fr
Subject: RE: [Caml-list] CDK license
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 09:24:12 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0106060909490.6656-100000@shell5.ba.best.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8E31D6933A2FE64F8AE3CC1381EEDCE704C231@NT.kal.com>
On Wed, 6 Jun 2001, Dave Berry wrote:
> > From: Sven LUTHER [mailto:luther@dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr]
> > > I would encourage people to use an X/BSD-like license for code
> whereever
> > > possible. It saves you all this hassle with determining what is and
> is
> > > not allowed, and which code may be linked or distributed with which
> > > other code.
> >
> > Yes, including taking all your code, doing some modification
> > to it, and giving nothing back.
>
> Yes. If someone wishes to do that, they can. Most people will choose
> to make changes available, because it benefits them if the open source
> library grows. And if they don't, at least they are still using OCaml
> libraries, and increasing the usage of OCaml. To me, this far outweighs
> any disadvantage.
I agree with Dave here. Besides, I don't think the {L}GPL prevents you
from modifying code and giving nothing back. It just means you can't
distribute that code. You could always use it for in-house software,
right (caveat; I'm not a lawyer, etc.)?
Anyways, I've appended a part of the GNAT modified GPL which I snatched
from the GNU Ada compiler libraries, which may be of interest. Note the
part about generic instantiation, which would correspond to functor
instantiation for MLers. I think this is something like what Sven was
mentioning with respect to the LGPL earlier.
> If your main aim is to protect your code from unwanted use, then go
> ahead and use the GPL or LGPL. If your main aim is to get your code
> used as widely as possible, use a less restrictive license. Surely the
> aim of the CDK is to promote wide use, rather than to restrict it?
That's my take on it. Besides, if I use someone else's library in a
commercial product, it seems that it would be in my best interests to
contribute fixes and enhancements. That's why I don't mind an LGPL like
approach which forces me to do so. What I don't want to do is to use
someone's library for some data structure and then have *all* of my code
forced to accept that license.
-- Brian
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
--
-- GNAT LIBRARY COMPONENTS
--
--
--
-- G N A T . S P I T B O L . P A T T E R N S
--
--
--
-- S p e c
--
--
--
-- $Revision: 1.17 $
--
--
-- Copyright (C) 1997-1999 Ada Core Technologies, Inc. --
--
--
-- GNAT is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it under --
-- terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the Free Soft- --
-- ware Foundation; either version 2, or (at your option) any later ver- --
-- sion. GNAT is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but WITH- --
-- OUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of MERCHANTABILITY --
-- or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the GNU General Public License --
-- for more details. You should have received a copy of the GNU General --
-- Public License distributed with GNAT; see file COPYING. If not, write --
-- to the Free Software Foundation, 59 Temple Place - Suite 330, Boston, --
-- MA 02111-1307, USA. --
--
--
-- As a special exception, if other files instantiate generics from this --
-- unit, or you link this unit with other files to produce an executable, --
-- this unit does not by itself cause the resulting executable to be --
-- covered by the GNU General Public License. This exception does not --
-- however invalidate any other reasons why the executable file might be --
-- covered by the GNU Public License. --
--
--
-- GNAT is maintained by Ada Core Technologies Inc (http://www.gnat.com). --
--
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr. Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-06-06 16:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-06-06 10:24 Dave Berry
2001-06-06 16:24 ` Brian Rogoff [this message]
2001-06-08 13:27 ` Sven LUTHER
2001-06-08 15:35 ` Brian Rogoff
2001-06-08 13:24 ` Sven LUTHER
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-06-06 9:44 Dave Berry
2001-06-06 10:04 ` Sven LUTHER
2001-06-06 15:44 ` Stefan Monnier
2001-06-07 1:25 ` Jacques Garrigue
2001-06-08 12:59 ` Sven LUTHER
2001-06-07 9:03 ` Joerg Czeranski
2001-05-30 19:06 Brian Rogoff
2001-05-31 1:05 ` rbw3
2001-06-06 7:05 ` Sven LUTHER
2001-06-06 7:42 ` Sven LUTHER
2001-05-31 2:27 ` Jacques Garrigue
2001-05-31 3:11 ` Brian Rogoff
2001-05-31 7:46 ` Fabrice Le Fessant
2001-06-06 7:40 ` Sven LUTHER
2001-06-06 8:36 ` reig
2001-06-06 8:51 ` Sven LUTHER
2001-05-31 22:05 ` John Max Skaller
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=Pine.BSF.4.21.0106060909490.6656-100000@shell5.ba.best.com \
--to=bpr@best.com \
--cc=Dave@kal.com \
--cc=caml-list@inria.fr \
--cc=luther@dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr \
--cc=reig@dcs.gla.ac.uk \
/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