Re: ocamlduce licence (was: removal of the ocaml-source binary package)
On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 06:08:54PM +1000, skaller wrote:
> 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..
Good idea, thanks. The more people ask the ocmalduce developers the better.