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

[Magnus Therning]

On Sat, Sep 27, 2008 at 4:59 PM, Simon Marlow <simonmarhaskell at gmail.com> wrote:
[..]
>> That would be serious indeed, but before changing my ways I'd need more
>> information to back up your statement.  Could someone confirm that code
>> from one installed module can be inlined into another?
>
> When optimisation is turned on, you have virtually no control over how much
> code GHC will copy from one module to another, which is why several people
> (me included) have expressed concerns about the use of an unmodified LGPL
> with Haskell code in the past.  I believe at one stage we even asked for
> clarification from the FSF, but I don't recall getting an answer.

Thanks for this clarification.  In my limited understanding of
licenses this would mean that in the Haskell world LGPL and GPL
basically are the same.  I suppose it's an excellent example of just
how difficult it is for "law" to keep up with technology, even when
the "law" is written by technologists.

I guess it means I might as well relicense all my Haskell code under
GPL instead.

I'm also disappointed to hear that the FSF hasn't bothered responding
to this issue.  What part of the FSF was approached?  Does someone
still have copies of the letters/email that was sent?

/M

-- 
Magnus Therning                        (OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4)
magnus＠therning．org          Jabber: magnus＠therning．org
http://therning.org/magnus         identi.ca|twitter: magthe