> Simon L Peyton Jones wrote:
> > So far as GHC is concerned, I wrote on this list a month ago:
> > "More specifically, I plan to continue beavering away on GHC.
> > GHC is public domain software, and Microsoft are happy for it to
> > remain so, source code and all. If anything, I'll have quite a bit
> > more time to work on it than before."
>
> Do you mean "public domain" literally, i.e. are you renouncing all
> copyright? (The source code contains copyright notices, but no
> licence, as far as I can see.)
No I am not renouncing all copyright. By "public domain" I mean freely
available for anyone to use for any purpose other than making money
by selling the compiler itself. That isn't a formal definition,
but I'm sure you see the intent.
I have carefully avoided getting tangled up in legal red tape, which
is why there is no formal license. It may be that my move to Microsoft
will force me to spend time sorting this out. But it's never been
a problem so far, and I doubt it will in the future, so I'm reluctant
to invest the time until pressed to do so.
Simon
