+1 Very similar to my point (see original thread), but put in a better way. :) As an interesting coincidence, this exact thing happened to someone just now. (thread "containers license issue")
Jonathan On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 5:00 PM, Clark Gaebel <[email protected]> wrote: > Since we've already heard from the aggressive (L)GPL side of this "debate", > I think it's time for someone to provide the opposite opinion. > > I write code to help users. However, as a library designer, my users are > programmers just like me. Writing my Haskell libraries with restrictions > like the (L)GPL means my users need to jump through hoops to use my > software, and I personally find that unacceptable. Therefore, I gravitate > more towards BSD3 and "beer-ware" type licenses. This also means my users > aren't subjected to my religious views just because they want to use my > "ones and zeros". > > Also, with GHC's aggressive inlining, even if you do have a static linking > exception in your (L)GPL license, it still may not hold up! Although the > entire idea is untested in court, GHC can (and will!) inline potentially > huge parts of statically linked libraries into your code, and this would > force you to break the license terms if you were to distribute the software > without source code. In Haskell-land, the GPL is the ultimate in viral > licensing, and very hard to escape. > > That's why I don't use (L)GPL licenses. > > Just making sure both sides have a horse in this race :) > - Clark > > > On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 9:51 AM, kudah <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Wed, 12 Dec 2012 10:06:23 +0100 Petr P <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > 2012/12/12 David Thomas <[email protected]> >> > >> > Yet another solution would be >> > what David Thomas suggest: To provide the source code to your users, >> > but don't allow them to use the code for anything but relinking the >> > program with a different version of the library (no distribution, no >> > modification etc.). >> >> You can also provide object code for linking, though I'm sure this >> will not work with Haskell object files. Providing alternative >> distribution of your program linked dynamically, or a promise to >> provide one on notice, also satisfies the LGPL as long as >> dynamic-version is as functional as the static and can be dropped-in >> as a replacement. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Haskell-Cafe mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe > > > > _______________________________________________ > Haskell-Cafe mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe > _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
