Re: [Haskell-cafe] Cabal && license combinations
It seems then that a package should be the least restrictive combination of all the licenses in all the contained modules.
Omit the words "least restrictive" and I think you are correct.
To combine licences, just aggregate them. There is no lattice of subsumption; no "more" or "less" restrictive ordering.
I was thinking that the lattice was already flattened into a list of licences. Currently the top-level package has a single licence field which is an arbitrary disjunctive choice. Much better is a conjunctive aggregation which is just as or less restrictive than the arbitrary disjunctive choice. Cheers, Vivian P.S. OK := acknowledge [ACK]
On Thu, 2011-02-10 at 19:00 +1300, Vivian McPhail wrote:
It seems then that a package should be the least restrictive combination of all the licenses in all the contained modules.
Omit the words "least restrictive" and I think you are correct.
To combine licences, just aggregate them. There is no lattice of subsumption; no "more" or "less" restrictive ordering.
I was thinking that the lattice was already flattened into a list of licences. Currently the top-level package has a single licence field which is an arbitrary disjunctive choice. Much better is a conjunctive aggregation which is just as or less restrictive than the arbitrary disjunctive choice.
Note that the license field in the .cabal specifies the license *for that package only* not the license of dependencies, or any notion of "effective" given the dependencies. Each package specifies its own license, then given a dependency tree we can calculate the set of licenses that users must simultaneously comply with. Duncan
participants (2)
-
Duncan Coutts -
Vivian McPhail