Chris Smith
I definitely interpret the license field in Cabal to refer to the terms and conditions that govern distribution of the entire program or library as a unit, including binaries.
I disagree, I've always interpreted the license to cover the text in that particular package. At any rate we need a different way to deal with this, since the license for the resulting binary can vary depending on build flags, different binaries from the same package can end up having different licensing, licensing can change if the licencing of a dependency changes, and so on. Perhaps cabal should look over the licenses involved, and inform the user after building? : Installing executable(s) in /home/ketil/.cabal/bin Executable 'foo' incorporates components with the following licenses: GPL BSD3 LGPL Executable 'bar' ... -k -- If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of giants