On Mon, Nov 29, 1999 at 03:06:07PM +0100, Marko Schuetz wrote:
For those who do not like to read legalese this is a standard
BSD license.
No it is not. The standard BSD license includes an evil advertising
clause. This one is thus better.
--
%%% Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho % [EMAIL PROTECTED] %
Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
On Mon, Nov 29, 1999 at 03:06:07PM +0100, Marko Schuetz wrote:
For those who do not like to read legalese this is a standard
BSD license.
No it is not. The standard BSD license includes an evil advertising
clause. This one is thus better.
There are
"Antti-Juhani" == Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Antti-Juhani On Mon, Nov 29, 1999 at 03:06:07PM +0100, Marko Schuetz wrote:
This was part of the quoted LICENSE file:
--- begin quote ---
For those who do not like to read legalese this is a standard
BSD license.
--- end
On Mon, Nov 29, 1999 at 06:05:12PM +0100, Lennart Augustsson wrote:
There are variants of the BSD license, some with an advertising clause,
some without. E.g., UCB, the originators of the BSD license, have removed
their need for an advertising clause.
I know. The point was that the original
Then, don t you think that, if we contact software companies, we
could find some one who would buy the idea? Of course, I would
not be able to sell the idea, but there are people in the Haskell
community with a better chance to get commercial and industrial
support for Haskell. As far as I
| I mean, a group who could produce a
| competitive compiler, useful not only to people who are
| interested in testing
| the language, but also in using it to produce commercial and
| industrial tools.
I think that would be absolutely splendid and I would do whatever
I could to support such a
It is not obvious that Haskell provides an order of magnitude improvement
in any of these areas. Where I think Haskell (or Haskell compiler
writers), could really be useful is in providing better XML transformation
languages and implementations. XML Schemas are emerging as the defacto
type
