Benjamin Geer wrote:
> Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
> > GPL and LGPL are really bad news as far as commercial entities are
> > concerned.
>
> This is (a) nonsense, since plenty of companies rely on the
> GPL in order to make money,

Let's keep this concrete.  Show me OCaml companies making GPL money in
whatever application domain, or any-other-language companies making
making GPL money in embedded controllers.  Where's the business model
here?  Show me the money.  If GPL is working anywhere in the embedded
market, why does it work?  Why does it fail?  How has it impacted the
growth of a language community?

> and (b) off-topic for this list.  Please don't subject us
> to yet another barrage of wildly misinformed anti-GPL FUD,
> least of all on caml-list.

I can see that you didn't accept my Preface, and I surmise you feel
strongly about licensing issues.  I'm not going to back down about
discussing them in Alex's specific case, however.  This is about what
will grow OCaml in the embedded marketplace, and what won't.

Instead of arguing with you, Benjamin, I'd rather ask Alex:

- why have you opted against a more traditional proprietary license, for
$XXXXXX, that gives full closed source proprietary control to the
licensee?

- why have you opted against a MIT style license?

I'm interested in understanding your choices, not berating them.


Cheers,                         www.indiegamedesign.com
Brand*n Van Every               S*attle, WA

Praise Be to the caml-list Bayesian filter! It blesseth
my postings, it is evil crap!  evil crap!  evil crap!

-------------------
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