English version
Accueil     À propos     Téléchargement     Ressources     Contactez-nous    

Ce site est rarement mis à jour. Pour les informations les plus récentes, rendez-vous sur le nouveau site OCaml à l'adresse ocaml.org.

Browse thread
[Caml-list] Dynamically evaluating OCaml code
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2004-04-14 (15:05)
From: John Goerzen <jgoerzen@c...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] BSD vs. GPL
On Wed, Apr 14, 2004 at 12:38:08AM -0700, Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
> Kenneth Knowles wrote:
> > Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
> > > I am not interested in Free Software as in 'free beer', I
> > > am interested
> > > as in 'free speech'.  And FWIW I'm on the MIT/BSD side of
> > > the debate.
> >
> > The primary motivation for much free software *is* FSF-style
> > idealism.
> True.  And I can't stand those people.

Ah, so you wish that everyone that released Free software did so under a
license that allow you to personally profit from it by including it in
your vaporware games, while simultaneously reducing the rights of the
people you give it to, compared to what the FSF-style authors gave out?

I have no problem using BSD/MIT-licensed software.  The software *I*
write is *all* under the GPL, because I want to guarantee everyone the
same rights to use, modify, and copy it, regardless of where or from
whom they received it.

If somebody wants to use my code in a commercial project, they are of
course welcome to negotiate a different license for that with me.  I'm
not going to let them use it for free unless they comply with the GPL.

It seems that you want to have your cake and eat it to.

> Idealists think the programmer is supposed to contribute massive amounts
> of time and money for the betterment of all mankind.  (Remember, time ==
> money.)  Pragmatists think the individual should contribute very little,

You have managed to probably mischaracterize both positions to such an
extent that your argument is worhless.  To read about what you call the
"idealists", please visit www.fsf.org/philosophy.  As a hint,
development methodology has nothing to do with it; freedoms do.

> So, if nobody else is interested in OCaml package management on Windows
> for now, don't be surprised that I don't volunteer to be the first upon
> the sacrificial altar.  I only do things on an as-needed basis.  I'd be
> happy to help if others have similar needs though.

If you're writing commercial code, what use do you have for OCaml
package management anyway?  You'll just link all the packages in at
build time.

Package management is only useful for people that compile things from
source.  (OK, *marginally* for people that load libraries dynamically)

-- John

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