Re: Accepted ocaml 3.08.0-1 (powerpc all source)

[Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr>]

On Thu, Jul 22, 2004 at 11:38:08PM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote:
> Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr> writes:
> 
> > On Thu, Jul 22, 2004 at 09:43:43AM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote:
> >> Quoting Sven Luther <luther@debian.org>:
> >> 
> >> >  ocaml (3.08.0-1) unstable; urgency=low
> >> >  .
> >> >    * New upstream release.
> >> >    * Do not install the emacs files, until upstream gives a response about
> >> > the
> >> >      licencing issue. (Closes: #227159, #227163)
> >>      ^^^^^^^^^^
> >> You shouldn't have listened to those debian-legal morons: we could have
> >> lived with it as we used to. What about people who were using this
> >> mode and seeing it suddenly vanish?
> >> 
> >> I think those people are wrong because:
> >> 
> >> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#IfInterpreterIsGPL
> >
> > Notice that i think the claim was that emacs provided bindings for the ocaml
> > mode to use, and thus is considered as a linked work, as per paragraph two of
> > the link you quoted above.
> 
> I don't understand how it applies to those emacs files. There is nothing
> such a JNI-like binding in thsi ocaml mode.
> Emacs calls the ocaml toplevel and that's all.

And the ocaml stuff doesn't use a single of the emacs hooks ?

> However, I found discrepencies: some .el files are QPL'ed and the
> rest of them GPL.

One is GPL 1, one is GPL 2, one is QPLed, and the rest are unlicenced, so
would fall under the QPL by default.

A dual QPL/GPL should make everyone happy, and the ball is in the ocaml team
camp.

Friendly,

Sven Luther