Re: NEW ocaml licence proposal by upstream, will be part of the 3.08.1 release going into sarge.

[Brian Thomas Sniffen <bts@alum.mit.edu>]

Richard Braakman <dark@xs4all.nl> writes:

> On Thu, Aug 19, 2004 at 02:09:52PM -0400, Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:
>> There were demands that I point at the DFSG, and I did so.  Now you
>> want a practical example.  Here's some attempts at one:
> [...]
>> * I can't fork the code, even distributing as patches.  There's no way
>>   for me to make XEmacs, which is FSF Emacs + code by people who won't
>>   transfer copyright to the FSF.
>
> This part I find particularly interesting, because I see the freedom
> to fork as fundamental.  I don't understand your reasoning, though.
> Can you explain what would go wrong if I tried to create an XOcaml?

INRIA downloads it and incorporates the neat features into the
proprietary version, which they sell to others.

> (Note that the source+patches problem itself is addressed by DFSG#4,
> though obviously not in the way I would like.)
>
> Richard Braakman

-- 
Brian Sniffen                                       bts@alum.mit.edu