Re: [Haskell-cafe] Re: Hmm, what license to use?

magnus:

On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 3:31 AM, brian wrote: [..]

...

as big a problem as I imagined. My understanding is that I can satisfy the requirements of the LGPL by dynamically linking, and that's already happening. Is there something else to worry about? I'd be in violation if I shipped something statically linked, but cabal doesn't seem inclined to do that by default.

I'm not sure I understand you here. Would you clarify your words here, bearing in mind that GHC doesn't do dynamic linking of Haskell modules?

Yes, its very simple: * C libraries are classically dynamically linked, so you're in compliance there with any LGPL C lib you use. (under the usual interpretation of the LGPL) * Haskell libraries are always statically linked and agressively inlined, so opinion seems to be that LGPL licensed *Haskell libaries* are unsuitable for any projects you want to ship commercially, without source code. * Only a small percent of Haskell libarires are LGPL, and nothing for which we don't have workarounds (e.g. HDBC vs galois-sqlite3 vs takusen). * None of the core system or Haskell platform are LGPLd, they're all "BSD3" * "BSD3" style reminds the vast majority, and preferred license, for Haskell code. IANAL. -- Don "ship some Haskell today" Stewart