I would encourage people to use an X/BSD-like license for code whereever
possible.  This license allows anyone to do anything whatsoever with the
code, provided that they keep the copyright notice and NO WARRANTY
notice.  It saves you all this hassle with determining what is and is
not allowed, and which code may be linked or distributed with which
other code.

>From a practical point of view, it allows a commercial organisation to
redistribute the code, and to include it with other products.  Assuming
you want OCaml to be used as widely as possible, this would be a Good
Thing.  

I can understand why INRIA want the compiler itself to be under a more
restrictive license (although I still disagree with that decision).  For
libraries, the argument doesn't hold.  The main requirement is to get
them used as widely as possible, with as few restrictions as possible on
their use.


-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr.  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr