Check your LICENSE files - FSF has a new physical address:
Copyright (C) 1989, 1991 Free Software Foundation, Inc.,
51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110-1301 USA
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"marpa parser" group.
To unsubscribe from t
The difference seems to be between what are called "permissive" licenses
and copyleft licenses. Perl license is a dual-license, and the licensee
gets the choice. The artistic license 1.0 seems to be accepted as
permissive. This "Perl license" is by far the most used license on CPAN,
and nobody s
Jeffrey Kegler writes:
>Under the LGPL, there were cases where the company lawyers told people they
>could not read my code.
Have you checked that GPL+Artistic would fix this? I would imagine that the
same lawyers would give the same answer.
--
Ed Avis
--
You received this message because
That's an interesting idea, but I think I want to go with the community
consensus. Nobody seems to express a problem with the Perl dual-license
not being liberal enough. The Perl Foundation's licensing advice centers
on it. And even the FSF, for Perl modules, suggests that following the
Perl com
If you want to make the licence strictly more liberal than before, you could
make it 'LGPL or Artistic' rather than 'GPL or Artistic'.
--
Ed Avis
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"marpa parser" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receivin
The folks on the marpa IRC channel and I have quietly begun a Marpa::R3
effort. This will eliminated everything kept in Marpa::R2 for backward
compatibility: The only supported interface will be the SLIF (which is the
one almost everyone uses anyway). This will clear the way to a refactoring
of
