Re: NEW ocaml licence proposal by upstream, will be part of the 3.08.1 release going into sarge.
On Tue, Aug 10, 2004 at 02:48:16PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> On 2004-08-10 10:37:28 +0100 Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr>
> wrote:
>
> >[...] as i don't really have time for another monster debian-legal
> >flamewar, and am more busy getting my packages ready for the sarge
> >release
> >than nit picking here.
>
> Well, don't post flamebait to debian-legal that seems to suggest that
> legal bugfixing is nit picking if you don't like flames :P
excessive legal bugfixing is.
> >[...] in the next year or so, in followup to the CECILL licencing
> >move.
>
> Please, I'd appreciate any news on ocaml moving to CECILL being posted
> to debian-legal, if you can do that. TIA.
Read the mailing archive, i think i posted it two times already. It will not
be the CECILL licence, but some other future licence of the same family. But
this is too early to discuss here now, and i will sure keep debian-legal
informed about any such moves.
> >The Compiler is distributed under the terms of the Q Public License
> >version 1.0 (included below).
>
> I don't think this is still "the" QPL after the (permitted) edits, but
> "a" QPL. A similar description contributed to the Oslo/Amsterdamn
> problem in the QPL summary draft.
It is the plain QPL, the only change being the choice of law, which trolltech
allowed to change, and now plainly states that the choice of law is the french
one, and nothing more.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: