there will never be an expressive enough licenses datatype. Law is
complicated and fluid and changing. Period.
On Sat, Mar 7, 2015 at 3:43 PM, Francesco Ariis
On Sat, Mar 07, 2015 at 12:50:19AM -0500, Carter Schonwald wrote:
i'm very uncomfortable with the "warn on other-license" change. I think theres lots of valid reasons that someone may be using an amended license (eg BSD / MIT plus an explicit patent license grant) that strictly more open/free than any standard OSS license on the planet.
I had a brief chat with dcoutts on freenode/#hackage, he informed me he would rather have the AllRightsReserved patch on hackage-server (and only in the public server branch) rather than cabal.
dcoutts also expressed similar objections on OtherLicense's warning (on the ground that dual licensing isn't supported by cabal yet, a a legitimate usage of OtherLicense).
My view is that, with an expressive enough License datatype which covers an ample portion of usages, the warning could still be pragmatically useful ("do you really have a reason to draft a new document when there is probably something tried and tested out there which could do for your case?").
Thanks for sharing your opinion! _______________________________________________ cabal-devel mailing list cabal-devel@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cabal-devel