Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    

This site is updated infrequently. For up-to-date information, please visit the new OCaml website at

Browse thread
[Caml-list] Caml-get 0.1
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2004-01-21 (15:53)
From: Maxence Guesdon <maxence.guesdon@i...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Caml-get 0.1
On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 16:33:29 +0100
Sven Luther <> wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 22, 2004 at 02:23:04AM +1100, skaller wrote:
> > On Thu, 2004-01-22 at 01:35, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 03:18:33PM +0100, Maxence Guesdon wrote:
> > 
> > > Notice that many licences mandate that either the full licence or a
> > > reduced version is available together with the source you distribute.
> > 
> > I think that is easily solved as Maxence suggested.
> > 
> > The problem is that some licences require that the 
> > licence or a reduced version of it *also* occur
> > in every source file, and not just as a separate
> > document in the distribution.
> Well, but at least the licence should be put in every source tarball or
> something, and i believe it is good that each individual file also comes
> with a single line telling the licence that is used and where to find
> it.

caml-get could have an option to add or remove the license content
for the caml-get elements in the .ml of .mli files. This way, you
work with no license information in your code, not to pollute your
file when you edit it, and when you're ready to distribute it, you
add the license information with one caml-get command.
What do you think of this ?
Another way could be for caml-get to generate LICENSE1, LICENSE2, ..., files
and add a reference to these files in the inserted code.


- Maxence

To unsubscribe, mail Archives:
Bug reports: FAQ:
Beginner's list: