[Haskell-cafe] Re: Hmm, what license to use?

Achim Schneider barsoap at web.de
Fri Sep 26 12:10:12 EDT 2008

Wolfgang Jeltsch <g9ks157k at acme.softbase.org> wrote:

> Am Freitag, 26. September 2008 09:24 schrieb Magnus Therning:
> > Now I have fairly strong feelings about freedom of code and I
> > everything I release is either under GPL or LGPL.
> Ah, the RMS prevarication. ;-)  Honestly, copyleft gives the user
> *less* freedom because he can no longer choose a license for
> redistribution freely.
That utterly depends on circumstance. Consider SDL and e.g. the id
engine: Indeed every SDL user is given the freedom to link the engine
to any SDL version he chooses, thus making it possible for
arcane-private-os user XYZ to quake to his heart's content.

The BSD is geared towards freedom of developers, the LGPL is geared
towards freedom of developers _and_ users, the GPL itself towards
freedom of all software. As with everything trying to influence
everything that isn't itself everything, it has serious issues with
reality compatibility.

I still think that the proper solution to the OP's problem isn't
yet another licence those vultures called lawyers can nitpick about,
but to support painless dynamic linking.

That means statically compiling Haskell to a .so or, preferable for
applications that are written in Haskell, loading .hi/.ho combinations
or even whole collections of those packed in a .hso or something.

(c) this sig last receiving data processing entity. Inspect headers
for copyright history. All rights reserved. Copying, hiring, renting,
performance and/or broadcasting of this signature prohibited.

More information about the Haskell-Cafe mailing list