Re: [Haskell-cafe] Hackage suggestion: Gather the list of the licenses of all dependencies of a package

Are you referring to: http://code.haskell.org/cpphs/LICENCE-commercial If the package is dual-licensed BSD3 and LGPL, maybe Malcolm could change the cabal file to mention the BSD3 so that its package description is less intimidating? On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 4:12 PM, Felipe Almeida Lessa < felipe.lessa@gmail.com> wrote:

While you're at it, maybe whitelisting cpphs would be nice as well =).

On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 12:03 PM, Michael Snoyman wrote:

...

On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 3:53 PM, Vincent Hanquez wrote:

...

On 12/13/2012 12:51 PM, Michael Snoyman wrote:

...

I think that's a great idea. I just implemented this on PackDeps:

http://packdeps.haskellers.com/licenses

As with all features on that site, I'll be happy to deprecate it as

...

...

...

as Hackage incorporates the feature in the future.

awesome Michael !

However i think ithis shouldn't take dependencies from tests and benchmarks. This doesn't make differences for the "overall" license that the library "exposes".

-- Vincent

Hmm, that's a good point. I'll admit I hadn't really thought this

soon through,

...

but I can actually see an argument going both ways on this:

* Viral licenses won't actually affect you if they're just used for test suites. * But company lawyers will probably be nervous about it anyway.

Nonetheless, I think you have the right of it. Unless people say otherwise, I'm going to implement Vincent's change.

Michael

_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe

-- Felipe.