[ocaml-platform] Maintainer notifications for opam-builder -- and other opam-builder enhancements

Yaron Minsky yminsky at janestreet.com
Sun Oct 2 22:00:25 BST 2016

Perhaps at this point a pointer to Simon Peyton Jones' recent post on
respectful discourse is in order.


I understand that people care deeply about these issues, but that doesn't
mean we shouldn't address them in a calm and respectful way. Discussing
these issues is hard enough without mixing harsh language into the debate.


On Sat, Oct 1, 2016 at 9:16 AM, Daniel Bünzli <daniel.buenzli at erratique.ch>

> On Saturday 1 October 2016 at 14:11, Fabrice Le Fessant wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 1, 2016 at 4:05 AM Daniel Bünzli <
> daniel.buenzli at erratique.ch (mailto:daniel.buenzli at erratique.ch)> wrote:
> > > While not granting the same rights to the contributor if you don't
> have a liberal (in the sense non GPL) license... What you say is a gross
> misrepresentation of the actual implications of the terms.
> >
> > Yes, the rights are not equal, but often, the contributions are not
> equal either. I have written 100% of the code of opam-builder, so why shall
> I give you the same rights on my code, just because you might eventually
> contribute 10 lines ? Are you the one who will maintain the full code over
> time, fix bugs in the lines you added, make them evolve, and so on ? You
> want the same rights, but without the same duties.
> Frankly I don't give a shit about what you do with your code or how you
> license it. Just notice that the system you setup will precisely *not*
> entice people to make large contributions or take over these duties.
> > We changed the license in your sense instead of introducing a CLA
> because you convinced everybody it was needed to increase the number of
> contributions.
> 1) The OPAM license wasn't changed in my sense, the bug of the license was
> fixed.
> 2) I never said it would increase the number of contributions. I said that
> CLAs were barriers to contribution [1].
> > Looking at the git logs in github.com/ocaml/opam (
> http://github.com/ocaml/opam), the number of contributions have actually
> decreased since the license went more liberal...
> The license didn't go more liberal, the license had a bug which was fixed
> so that it would correspond to the original intent.
> And about that decrease in contributions, my sincere apologies to the
> community, that is certainly because we didn't introduce a CLA, I'll take
> the blame for this.
> Daniel
> [1] http://lists.ocaml.org/pipermail/opam-devel/2016-January/001291.html
> _______________________________________________
> Platform mailing list
> Platform at lists.ocaml.org
> http://lists.ocaml.org/listinfo/platform
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ocaml.org/pipermail/platform/attachments/20161002/9c1345c4/attachment.html>

More information about the Platform mailing list