Re: ocamlduce licence (was: removal of the ocaml-source binary package)
On Thu, 2007-04-19 at 08:53 +0200, Ralf Treinen wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 08:27:19AM +1000, skaller wrote:
> > Ocamlduce isn't a library, it's a tool -- with the same
> > licence for its source as Ocaml.
> It also provides a library. In fact I had just last week a request
> from an upstream author to package his software (which he intended to
> licence under GPL). Unfortunately, he used the ocamlduce library. He
> says that since he had been basing his project on ocamlduce from the start
> it would be dificult to switch to something else now. He wasn't aware
> of this licence problem, just trusting that he could use for his project
> any libraries that were available in his working environment.
> That is exactly why I oppose to having this stuff in debian unless
> they change the licence. The difference with ocaml is that libraries and
> runtime system are LGPL, hence one can use ocaml for one's project and still
> release under GPL.
Ah, I see -- well, why not ask? CC'd this to Alain Frisch,
lets see what he says..
John Skaller <skaller at users dot sf dot net>
Felix, successor to C++: http://felix.sf.net