Haskell Platform Proposal: HLint

Simon Marlow marlowsd at gmail.com
Thu Nov 11 09:50:39 EST 2010

On 11/11/2010 11:07, Duncan Coutts wrote:
> On 10 November 2010 18:55, Don Stewart<dons at galois.com>  wrote:
>> Libraries with non-BSD deps haven't been considered for the HP, and
>> would be problematic, in my opinion. Applications are far less of a
>> concern, though guaranteeing that anything in the platform can be hacked
>> freely for any use would be a positive statement.
> Yes, at some point before the next proposal round opens I'd like to
> propose a policy along the lines that HP packages must be usable for
> developing software under any reasonable license including proprietary
> licenses. That would allow GPL tools (e.g. gcc is GPL but is used to
> compile proprietary code) and allow LGPL libs but would exclude GPL
> libs. I expect the contentious point in such a discussion to be around
> LGPL libs (partly because there tends to be a great deal of
> unnecessary confusion around it anyway).


But I vote against allowing LGPL libs in.  For a start, wouldn't it have 
to be LGPL + static linking exception anyway?  And exactly what form 
should the static linking exception take?  There are already several of 
them floating around, some harder to understand than others. See 
previous thread here:



More information about the Libraries mailing list