Hello, On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 10:02, Damien Doligez <damien.doli...@inria.fr> wrote: > For example, I don't understand why you > would need a detailed review of the code in order to notice that the > licence (which you quoted) is an exact copy of the new BSD licence > (straight from www.opensource.org, IIRC).
I already acknowledged that I should have noticed that the license is an exact copy of the new BSD license. However, from past experience, it happens that such software coming from a national or european project with multiple contributors might mix multiple (and even incompatible) licenses for the different part of the code. Thus my question regarding code review. (I'm *not* saying this is the case for Focalize) > Whether you (or the Debian developers, Microsoft management, or > whoever else) choose to call it Free is a matter of political > opinion and debate on this topic is usually a waste of time. I entirely agree (for caml-list@). I'll should have avoided this part of the question. <formal tools rant for 2009> Formal verification tools have such a high cost to learn and use them that I personally won't *consider* them if they not Free Software (according to FSF or Debian). It is hard enough to convince colleagues and management of the usefulness of such tools without being annoyed by restriction of use. </rant> Yours, d. _______________________________________________ Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management: http://yquem.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/caml-list Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs
