Re: [Haskell-cafe] ANN: hakyll-0.1
minh thu writes: > I wonder how APIs are covered. I don't think an API would be covered. The API is the standard way to use something, if copyright licenses cover usage like this, any executable will be a derivative of the operating system and (possibly) the compiler. > Why should your code be licensed under GPL? I think your code is covered by whatever license you wish. An aggregate work, on the other hand, would need to be covered by the GPL, and all source code would have to be available under GPL terms. So if you distribute your code linked to or incorporating the GPL library, the whole must conform to the GPL license (source availability and redistributatbility, etc). Your contributions could still be licensed under a different license (e.g. BSD), as long as the licensing doesn't prevent somebody else to pick it up and relicense it under GPL. At least, that's how I understand things. -k -- If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of giants ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] ANN: hakyll-0.1
2009/12/8 Ivan Lazar Miljenovic : > Gregory Crosswhite writes: >> That really just means that BSD3 code can be used in GPL code; you >> still have to release your own code as GPL if you are including any >> GPL code. > > Not quite true: it means that any code your BSD3 library gets used in > has to have a GPL-compatible license: > > http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl-faq.html#IfLibraryIsGPL > > (this is the approach I've used for Graphalyze since I use Pandoc as a > default library for document generation; later on I'm planning on > re-doing the document part in which case it will _have_ to use Pandoc > and thus I'll re-license the library). I wonder how APIs are covered. If your code use an API implemented by Pandoc (GPL) and also by another library licensed under, say, BSD3. Why should your code be licensed under GPL ? The only difference would be a build-depends in the .cabal. Has anyone an idea about this ? Cheers, Thu ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] ANN: hakyll-0.1
Gregory Crosswhite writes: > That really just means that BSD3 code can be used in GPL code; you > still have to release your own code as GPL if you are including any > GPL code. Not quite true: it means that any code your BSD3 library gets used in has to have a GPL-compatible license: http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl-faq.html#IfLibraryIsGPL (this is the approach I've used for Graphalyze since I use Pandoc as a default library for document generation; later on I'm planning on re-doing the document part in which case it will _have_ to use Pandoc and thus I'll re-license the library). -- Ivan Lazar Miljenovic ivan.miljeno...@gmail.com IvanMiljenovic.wordpress.com ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] ANN: hakyll-0.1
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 8:22 AM, Gregory Crosswhite [..] > If Pandoc is LGPL, then I think that means we are dealing with an entirely > different situation, one in which the library user can choose whatever > license he or she likes for his or her own code as long as any modifications > to the LGPL'd library itself are released under the LGPL. As has been discussed a few times before on this list, using LGPL for Haskell modules has its own set of problems when using GHC, due to the current state of linking in that compiler. From what I've read we're on a path to salvation with 6.12, but we're still not at the destination. /M -- Magnus Therning(OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4) magnus＠therning．org Jabber: magnus＠therning．org http://therning.org/magnus identi.ca|twitter: magthe ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
RE: [Haskell-cafe] ANN: hakyll-0.1
Gregory Crosswhite wrote: >> Tom Tobin wrote: >> >> The 3 clause BSD license is officially a GPL compatible license. >> See: >> >> >> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#GPLCompatibleLicenses >> >> It is within the terms of the GPL to link GPL code to a bunch of BSD3 >> code as long as you abide by both the GPL and the BSD3 license. > > That really just means that BSD3 code can be used in GPL code; you > still have to release your own code as GPL if you are including any > GPL code. The main licence of darcs is GPL, but I've licensed all my contributions to it as BSD3. My view of this is that while darcs as a whole is obviously still GPL, any of my contributions that can be extracted independently can be used in other projects under BSD3. I'd say that with hakyll, the library itself can be under BSD3 but any executable you produce from it at the moment will necessarily be GPL. Not sure if there's any good way to communicate this fact in the metadata, though. Ganesh === Please access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic communications disclaimer: http://www.credit-suisse.com/legal/en/disclaimer_email_ib.html === ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] ANN: hakyll-0.1
Gregory Crosswhite wrote: > >> I *really* wish Pandoc would switch to a non-copyleft license. > > > > The LGPL is still a copyleft license. Do you still have a problem > > with that? > > If Pandoc is LGPL, I wasn't suggesting that pandoc was LGPL, I was probing the other posters attitudes to copyleft licenses other than the GPL. Erik -- -- Erik de Castro Lopo http://www.mega-nerd.com/ ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] ANN: hakyll-0.1
> Tom Tobin wrote: > > The 3 clause BSD license is officially a GPL compatible license. See: > >http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#GPLCompatibleLicenses > > It is within the terms of the GPL to link GPL code to a bunch of BSD3 code > as long as you abide by both the GPL and the BSD3 license. That really just means that BSD3 code can be used in GPL code; you still have to release your own code as GPL if you are including any GPL code. Having said that... >> I *really* wish Pandoc would switch to a non-copyleft license. > > The LGPL is still a copyleft license. Do you still have a problem > with that? If Pandoc is LGPL, then I think that means we are dealing with an entirely different situation, one in which the library user can choose whatever license he or she likes for his or her own code as long as any modifications to the LGPL'd library itself are released under the LGPL. Cheers, Greg ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] ANN: hakyll-0.1
Tom Tobin wrote: > I hate to say this, but it looks like you're violating the GPL by not > releasing Hakyll under the GPL, since Pandoc is GPL'd. Not necessarily. The 3 clause BSD license is officially a GPL compatible license. See: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#GPLCompatibleLicenses It is within the terms of the GPL to link GPL code to a bunch of BSD3 code as long as you abide by both the GPL and the BSD3 license. Hakyll would only run into trouble if it was used as a library that linked to code which was not under a GPL compatible license. > I *really* wish Pandoc would switch to a non-copyleft license. The LGPL is still a copyleft license. Do you still have a problem with that? > (Pretty please, with sugar and cherries on top?) Most chunks of code can't switch license because they have dozens of contributions from dozens of people many of whom they no longer have contact with. Erik -- -- Erik de Castro Lopo http://www.mega-nerd.com/ ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] ANN: hakyll-0.1
Okay, You're right. I will change the license info as soon as possible. Kind regards, Jasper Van der Jeugt On Dec 8, 2009 6:30 AM, "Tom Tobin" wrote: On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 6:35 AM, Jasper van der Jeugt wrote: > Hakyll is a simp... I hate to say this, but it looks like you're violating the GPL by not releasing Hakyll under the GPL, since Pandoc is GPL'd. I don't think you're alone in this — IIRC I've seen several Hackage libraries doing the same thing. I *really* wish Pandoc would switch to a non-copyleft license. (Pretty please, with sugar and cherries on top?) I know that GPL authors are trying to enforce contributions, but the opposite can very well happen: if you have an "essential" copyleft library, someone's eventually going to write a non-copyleft replacement for it (e.g., witness the replacements for Readline) rather than continue to allow it to restrict the licensing options of the community. Great libraries should be able to be embraced without reservations. ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Re: [Haskell-cafe] ANN: hakyll-0.1
On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 6:35 AM, Jasper van der Jeugt wrote: > Hakyll is a simple static site generator library, mostly aimed at blogs. It > supports markdown, tex and html templates. > > It is inspired by the ruby Jekyll program. It has a very small codebase > because it makes extensive use of the excellent pandoc and Text.Template > libraries. > > More information can be found on: > http://hackage.haskell.org/package/hakyll-0.1 > http://github.com/jaspervdj/Hakyll I hate to say this, but it looks like you're violating the GPL by not releasing Hakyll under the GPL, since Pandoc is GPL'd. I don't think you're alone in this — IIRC I've seen several Hackage libraries doing the same thing. I *really* wish Pandoc would switch to a non-copyleft license. (Pretty please, with sugar and cherries on top?) I know that GPL authors are trying to enforce contributions, but the opposite can very well happen: if you have an "essential" copyleft library, someone's eventually going to write a non-copyleft replacement for it (e.g., witness the replacements for Readline) rather than continue to allow it to restrict the licensing options of the community. Great libraries should be able to be embraced without reservations. ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
