> > > Regarding license ... I suppose LGPL could be fine.
> >
> > The new "user code library" is a good idea, but GPL
> > and LGPL are both bad ideas.
>
> The best idea is to use the same licence the ocaml runtime currently
> uses :
>
> The Library is distributed under the terms of the GNU Library General
> Public License version 2 (found in /usr/share/common-licenses/LGPL-2
> on debian systems).

And what about a "do anything you want with it, including compiling,
modifiying, inserting bugs" license ?
I mean, this kind of collaborative work shouldn't even be (c)
(although it's fair to maintain a list of contributors somewhere in the
distribution)

Nicolas Cannasse

-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners