Re: NEW ocaml licence proposal by upstream, will be part of the 3.08.1 release going into sarge.
Matthew Garrett <email@example.com> writes:
> On Thu, 2004-08-19 at 17:09, Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:
>> Matthew Garrett <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
>> > What is the difference between granting of extra permissions and
>> > granting of extra freedoms?
>> Nothing. Therefore, I require you to grant me a permissive license to
>> all code you have ever written.
>> Oh wait, that doesn't seem free to you? Why? Because it's a
>> requirement. What's the difference between charity and tax? Tax is a
>> requirement, charity is freely given.
> No, it seems non-free because it's a contamination of other software,
> which is something we believe to be outside the scope of a free software
Hm. It is objectionable because it's a contamination, but I think
it's also objectionable because it's a requirement that distribution
of modifications be under a license the modifier didn't have.
In any case, a more direct answer is that your original question about
the difference between grants of permissions and freedoms is
irrelevant. I was and am talking about the difference between a grant
of extra permissions and a compelled grant of extra permissions, and
objecting to the compulsion as non-free.
Brian Sniffen email@example.com