|Subject:||[Haskell-cafe] Re: Hmm, what license to use?|
|Date:||Fri, 26 Sep 2008 16:54:57 +0100|
Magnus Therning wrote:
I've heard that the OCaml crowd uses a modified LGPL with a static linking exception. Unfortunately I've also heard that their addition to LGPL hasn't gotten much review by lawyers, I'd much rather use something that feels less ad hoc, if you get what I mean. Any suggestions?
I don't know of any "officially sanctioned" licenses that have this property, but I'd just like to call for the LGPL + static linking exception license to be made more visible by putting it on the wiki somewhere, or perhaps including it as an option for the license field in Cabal. We need to publicise the fact that complying with the LGPL is difficult in the context of Haskell, and give people a way to easily work around it.
Cheers, Simon _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
|<Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread>|
|Previous by Date:||RE: [Haskell-cafe] Hmm, what license to use?, Michael Giagnocavo|
|Next by Date:||Re: [Haskell-cafe] Hmm, what license to use?, Jonathan Cast|
|Previous by Thread:||[Haskell-cafe] Re: Hmm, what license to use?, Achim Schneider|
|Next by Thread:||Re: [Haskell-cafe] Hmm, what license to use?, Malcolm Wallace|
|Indexes:||[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]|