From: Sylvain Le Gall <sylvain@le-gall.net>
To: caml-list@inria.fr
Subject: Re: License question - QPL vs. SCM
Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2008 20:00:44 +0000 (UTC) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <slrnfvkvbc.tll.sylvain@gallu.homelinux.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <733916.43443.qm@web54605.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
On 07-04-2008, Dario Teixeira <darioteixeira@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> My opinion is probably biased though. I've always thought QPL was a silly
>> license. The whole idea that you can release source + patches but not the
>> patched sources seems absurd to me. There is no difference between the two.
>
> It's not silly if you intend to make clear what comes from upstream
> and what has been modified. Debian packages are organised like this:
> unmodified upstream tarball + Debian patches. In a different domain,
> the American constitution works the same way: there's the original
> text + patches (that go by the name "amendments").
>
I think distributing tarball + patches are ok, but a lot of SCM will
interleave changes which leads you to have a really borderline situation
where delta are not patches... This is a very dangerous interpretation.
I won't go this way -- because this thread will finish as a std battle
of what is SCM, how delta are stored et al...
Regards,
Sylvain Le Gall
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-04-07 20:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-04-07 4:29 Edgar Friendly
2008-04-07 19:10 ` [Caml-list] " Peng Zang
2008-04-07 19:17 ` Adrien
2008-04-07 19:54 ` Dario Teixeira
2008-04-07 20:00 ` Sylvain Le Gall [this message]
2008-04-07 20:09 ` [Caml-list] " Edgar Friendly
2008-04-07 20:14 ` [Caml-list] " Peng Zang
2008-04-09 15:21 ` Xavier Leroy
2008-04-09 16:24 ` Edgar Friendly
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=slrnfvkvbc.tll.sylvain@gallu.homelinux.org \
--to=sylvain@le-gall.net \
--cc=caml-list@inria.fr \
/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