licence

[Mildred Ki'Lya]

On 11/11/2009 11:54 AM, Nicolas Boulay wrote:
> For the Lisaac compiler :
> GPL V3 + http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gcc-exception.html
>
> In the last text, GCC must be replaced by "Lisaac Compiler". This text
> should be added and" GPL + exception" should be used as copyright for
> the code from the compiler that will be put in the binaries.
>   

I created a HTML file for our exceptions. Is that what you wanted ?

> For the library,
> We choose "LGPL V3 + global compilation exception"
>
> I haven't yet any answer from the FSF.
>
> i propose a derived form of the licence from freePascal, this must be
> put a specific file and a mention should give
> "LGPL V3 + global compilation exception (see
> licence_global_compilation_exception.txt)" for example.
>
> "As a special exception, the copyright holders of this library give
> you permission to compile this library with independent modules to
> produce an executable, regardless of the license terms of these
> independent prototypes, and to copy and distribute the resulting
> executable under terms of your choice, provided that you also meet,
> for each compiled independent prototypes, the terms and conditions of the
> license of that prototypes. An independent prototype is a prototype which is not
> derived from or based on this library. "
>
> origin :
> "As a special exception, the copyright holders of this library give
> you permission to [link] this library with independent modules to
> produce an executable, regardless of the license terms of these
> independent [modules], and to copy and distribute the resulting
> executable under terms of your choice, provided that you also meet,
> for each linked independent [module], the terms and conditions of the
> license of that [module]. An independent [module] is a module which is not
> derived from or based on this library. [If you modify this library, you
> may extend this exception to your version of the library, but you not
> obligated to do so. If you do not wish to do so, delete this exception
> statement from your version.]"
>
> I had removed the last part, because i think we want the same licence
> inside the library.
>   

I think we SHOULD include the last statement.

If we do not, any modified version of the library can't be compiled in a
project that has a conflicting licence.

Take an example: if you notice a bug in the library (there are many
bugs) and you create your own version of the library, then your version
is not covered by the exception, and the resulting executable MUST be
LGPL. This isn't what we want I think.

Mildred.

-- 
Mildred Ki'Lya
╭───────── ｍｉｌｄｒｅｄ５９３＠ｏｎｌｉｎｅ．ｆｒ ──────────
│ Jabber, GoogleTalk: <mildred at jabber.fr>
│ Website: <http://ki.lya.online.fr>           GPG ID: 9A7D 2E2B
│ Fingerprint: 197C A7E6 645B 4299 6D37 684B 6F9D A8D6 9A7D 2E2B

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/lisaac-devel/attachments/20091111/3ee6fead/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/lisaac-devel/attachments/20091111/3ee6fead/attachment.pgp>