Re: Ocaml status?
On Thu, Apr 06, 2000 at 08:53:45PM +0200, Henning Makholm wrote:
> The bytecode interpreter and the run-time libraries needed to
> be linked with it are all GPL.
Not according to the copyright file. The copyright file included
in Debian says LGPL.
> The ocaml source for the compiler itself is QPL.
True.
> The choice of QPL for the compiler is somewhat peculiar, given
> that it is not related to Qt at all. It is concievable that the
> author of Ocaml simply likes the QPL better than the GPL.
The authors position, as explained by them in a long flamewar on
gnu.misc.discuss, was that they didn't want anyone ripping off
their code to improve stuff like Java and other non functional
programming languages, which is why they were going to stay non-free.
Apparently, they were convinced that Open Source or DFSG-free
was the way to go, so they picked the most restrictive license
they could find to keep people from improving "inferior"
technologies. (Sorry if that was a little opinionated - but
the facts should be accurate.)
--
David Starner - dstarner98@aasaa.ofe.org
Only a nerd would worry about wrong parentheses with
square brackets. But that's what mathematicians are.
-- Dr. Burchard, math professor at OSU
Reply to: