Re: ocamlexc (was: ocaml-tools ?)
On Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 09:06:46AM +0200, Judicael Courant wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Ralf Treinen wrote:
> > >
> > > What about integrating ocamlexc
> [...]
> >
> > There is no licence, I will contact the authors about this. Another
> > problem is of course ocamltk, as some of you have already pointed
> > out. Sven, could you resume maintenance of this package?
> >
> > On the other hand if ocamltk is non-free then camlexc must be
> > nonfree, too.
>
> Hmm, notice that ocamltk is not needed to run camlexc:
> "As mentioned above, a simple raw text output is provided, but users may
> prefer to use the graphical user interface available via the OcamlTk
> library." (from http://pauillac.inria.fr/caml/ocamlexc/ocamlexc.htm).
With a suggest then. Or maybe there are 2 executables that can be built, one
with ocamltk support, the other without, and placed in 2 different packages.
But then anyway, it makes sense to try to free the ocamltk package. Let's see
what the authors have to say about it.
> As for camltk, I have not read the licence, but I guess the problem is
There is no licence in the package.
> that it is a non-free INRIA licence. Am I right? Now, the position of
> INRIA about free-software has been evolving a lot for a few years. So
The 1997 package contained the old INRIA licence, i guess they would be
willing to have a new licencenow, maybe i already have a response further donw
in the mail.
> maybe we could ask them to change ocamltk licence. I can contact them
> about this or discuss them directly with them next time I will go to
> INRIA. Ralf, I suggest we discuss this issue further as soon as you
> arrive at work :-)
Maybe, if a solution is not found before.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: