"Brian Hulley" <brianh@metamilk.com> wrote:
I wonder if the authors of the library could be persuaded to make it available under an Open Source license, because currently it is under the very limiting restrictions imposed by LGPL...
You have a very non-standard definition of "Open Source", if the GPL and LGPL do not fit in, since those are classic Free Software licences! The Google SoC rules insist that all work produced under their programme be Open Source according to the OSI definition at http://www.opensource.org/
(ie incomaptible with commercial development and the "normal" Haskell library license)
I believe you are wrong. Both the GPL and the LGPL (more so the latter) are perfectly compatible with commercial development. Specifically, the GPL and BSD3 (as used by ghc) licences are compatible, in the sense that you can freely combine BSD3 code with GPL code. Plenty of people make money from closed-source projects that include LGPL'd components. If what you really mean by "open source" is the ability to take code and into make non-open modifications to it (as BSD permits), then that is far more demanding than what most people mean by the term. Regards, Malcolm