[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [xavier.leroy@inria.fr: Re: [Caml-list] Copyright Clarifications]

On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 11:42:56AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 11:35:53AM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote:
> > You don't need to split it: just remove it entirely and add a comment
> > in README.Debian.
> Calm down :)
> Yes, you're right, we can't ship ocaml as it is right now. OTOH BigNum
> is really an important library and IMO we should do our best to ship it
> in non-free (assuming here there's no free-software Taleban :).
> The right thing(TM) to do seems to split two new libbignum-ocaml{,-dev}
> packages. Who is going to do it? Sven?

I will do nothing hasty until there is definite answer that the licence
issue cannot be solved. If this happen, i will split out bignum, and
make a new source upload, and see if i can do a non-free package for
bignum (or ask some folk from the ocaml team to do it). 

But, this will happen only after the testing migration is completed, so,
as said, business as usual, there will still be time to make high
priority cleanup later on, if it is needed.


Sven Luther

Reply to: