[opam-devel] Opam license bug

Jeremie Dimino jdimino at janestreet.com
Tue Jan 19 11:03:13 GMT 2016

​(adding Mark)​

On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 8:47 AM, Daniel Bünzli <daniel.buenzli at erratique.ch>

> Le mardi, 19 janvier 2016 à 08:56, Roberto Di Cosmo a écrit :
> > So, well, first of all, let me totally and deeply disagree on the
> cursorily repeated assertions in this thread that imply that GPL is BAD and
> BSD is GOOD. This kind of generic self asserting statements are ok among
> kids, not grown up persons able to master a sophisticated language like
> OCaml.
> If you had actually taken time to read me rather than make pointless
> inflammatory comments, you would have realized that I never implied this at
> any point in the discussion.
> So to help your inability to read here's a summary of what I said:
> 1. Having the LGPL and the proposed unfair CLA is inacceptable. It is
> harmful to the growth of the project and hence given the status of the
> project in the OCaml community to the latter itself.
> 2. If OCamlPro wants to have more leeway to do whatever it wishes with
> opam and its contributions they should rather license it under a more
> liberal license and avoid the CLA.
> 3. I'm perfectly fine if opam stays with the LGPL. I'm not however fine
> with the added CLA.
> So now do actually try to act like a grown up person and comment on the
> actual problem which is the unfair CLA, not the LGPL vs BSD problem.
> Best,
> Daniel
> _______________________________________________
> opam-devel mailing list
> opam-devel at lists.ocaml.org
> http://lists.ocaml.org/listinfo/opam-devel

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ocaml.org/pipermail/opam-devel/attachments/20160119/d4c06496/attachment.html>

More information about the opam-devel mailing list