[Haskell-cafe] Dual-licensing the package on Hackage

[Krzysztof Skrzętnicki]

Perhaps it would be best if .cabal allowed to have more than one license
listed.

Another solution would be to use custom field, for example:

License: GPL
x-Other-License: Commercial, see License-Commercial.txt

All best,
Krzysztof Skrzętnicki

On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 11:44 AM, David Sorokin <david.sorokin at gmail.com>wrote:

> Thanks Thu,
>
> I agree with you. Just I don't know what to write in the license field of
> the .cabal file: GPL or OtherLicense. The both choices seem correct to me
> and misleading at the same time.
>
> Cheers,
> David
>
> 30.07.2013, в 12:53, Vo Minh Thu написал(а):
>
> > 2013/7/30 David Sorokin <david.sorokin at gmail.com>:
> >> Hi, Cafe!
> >>
> >> Probably, it was asked before but I could not find an answer with help
> of Google.
> >>
> >> I have a library which is hosted on Hackage. The library is licensed
> under BSD3. It is a very specialized library for a small target group. Now
> I'm going to relicense it and release a new version already under the
> dual-license: GPLv3 and commercial. In most cases GPL will be sufficient as
> this is not a library in common sense.
> >>
> >> Can I specify the GPL license in the .cabal file, or should I write
> OtherLicense?
> >>
> >> I'm going to add the information about dual-licensing in the
> description section of the .cabal file, though.
> >
> > Although you can indeed license your software under different
> > licences, in the case of your question it doesn't seem to be a concern
> > with Hackage:
> >
> > The license displayed on Hackage is the one for the corresponding
> > .cabal file (or at least I think it is). So you issue your new version
> > with the changed license, the new version is available with the new
> > license, the old versions are still available with the old license.
> > Everything is fine.
> >
> > Now about the dual licensing. It seems it is again not a problem with
> > Hackage: you are not granting through Hackage such a commercial
> > license. I guess you provide it upon request (for some money). I.e.
> > when I download your library from Hackage, I receive it under the
> > terms of the BSD (or GPL) license you have chosen, not under a
> > commercial license that I would have to receive through other means.
> >
> > Otherwise the semantic of the license field on Hackage would mean the
> > library is available under such and such licenses, which are not
> > granted to you when you download the library on Hackage. Only when you
> > download the package you can actually find the licensing terms (e.g.
> > in the LICENSE file). But this seems unlikely to me.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Thu
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
> Haskell-Cafe at haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-cafe/attachments/20130730/e4fcaad4/attachment.htm>