On 07/01/13 09:08, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
Which code is being discussed here, specifically? The Cabal file for 'base'
specifies a BSD3 license.
The question was about the "extensible-exceptions" package:
http://hackage.haskell.org/package/extensible-exceptions
Cheers,
Simon
Simon
| -----Original Message-----
| From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
| On Behalf Of Ian Lynagh
| Sent: 06 January 2013 23:21
| To: Pavel Zelinsky
| Cc: Simon Marlow; [email protected]
| Subject: Re: Question about extensible-exceptions (to official
| extensible-exceptions maintainer - GHC HQ)
|
|
| [full mail quoted as it doesn't look like the original made it to the
| list]
|
| Hi Pavel,
|
| On Fri, Jan 04, 2013 at 05:08:15PM -0700, Pavel Zelinsky wrote:
| >
| > Dear Ian Lynagh and Simon Marlow,
| >
| > I working with our attorneys an clarifying the Extensible-Exceptions
| > license and I have a question.
| >
| > The license clearly states that code derived from Haskell 98 Report is
| > distributed under the Report license. At the same time, the Report
| > license and report itself does not specify code license, but rather
| > entire report license and modified report.
| >
| > So what we are trying to understand:
| > 1) What specifically code was derived from the Report if any?
|
| I'm not a lawyer, so can't offer legal advice (and certainly I'm not
| qualified to say whether the extensible exceptions code would be
| considered to be derived from the more primitive exceptions API in the
| Haskell 98 report).
|
| But I wonder why it matters whether the extensible-exceptions code is
| under that licence, when anything using it presumably also uses base or
| haskell98, which both have the same licence? Unless perhaps you're
| porting it to a different language or something?
|
| > 2) If the derived code was compiled with the following language in the
| > license: "modified version is clearly presented as such, and that it
| > does not claim to be a definition of the Haskell 98 Language"?
| > Same questions about the "Haskell Foreign..." license.
|
| I didn't follow that. Did you mean "complies with" rather than "was
| compiled with"? If so, I don't think that anyone would say that
| extensible-exceptions claims to be a definition of the Haskell 98
| Language (but again, I'm not a lawyer etc).
|
| > I'm attaching below excerpts from your license for your convenience.
| >
| > Also I'm copying you (see below) on the similar communication with
| > Milan Straka on Haskell_Containers license. Essentially Milan
| > responded that there is no part of source code of containers that is
| > derived from the Report or from Haskell Foreign Function Interface.
| > Also he changed the license, so it does not mention neither Haskell
| > Report nor Haskell FFI. I hope it is the same case with
| > Extensible-Exceptions, so confusion can be resolved.
| >
| > Thank you!
| >
| > Pavel Zelinsky
| >
| > Pavel Zelinsky
| > Senior Manager and Group Leader, DemandTec Softlines Science IBM
| > Enterprise Marketing Management
| >
| >
| >
| > Phone: 1-303-800-4562
| IBM
| > E-mail: [email protected]
| > 1 Franklin
| Parkway
| > San Mateo, CA
| 94403
| > United
| > States
| >
| >
| >
| > Extensible-Exceptions license:
| > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
| -------
| > * Code from the Haskell 98 Report which is (c) Simon Peyton Jones
| > and freely redistributable (but see the full license for
| > restrictions).
| >
| > * Code from the Haskell Foreign Function Interface specification,
| > which is (c) Manuel M. T. Chakravarty and freely redistributable
| > (but see the full license for restrictions).
| >
| > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
| > -------
| >
| > Code from the Haskell 98 Report which is (c) Simon Peyton Jones
| > and freely redistributable (but see the full license for
| > restrictions).
| >
| > * Code from the Haskell Foreign Function Interface specification,
| > which is (c) Manuel M. T. Chakravarty and freely redistributable
| > (but see the full license for restrictions).Code derived from the
| > document "Report on the Programming Language Haskell 98", is
| > distributed under the following license:
| >
| > Copyright (c) 2002 Simon Peyton Jones
| >
| > The authors intend this Report to belong to the entire Haskell
| > community, and so we grant permission to copy and distribute it for
| > any purpose, provided that it is reproduced in its entirety,
| > including this Notice. Modified versions of this Report may also be
| > copied and distributed for any purpose, provided that the modified
| > version is clearly presented as such, and that it does not claim to
| > be a definition of the Haskell 98 Language.
| >
| > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
| > -------
| >
| > Code derived from the document "The Haskell 98 Foreign Function
| > Interface, An Addendum to the Haskell 98 Report" is distributed under
| > the following license:
| >
| > Copyright (c) 2002 Manuel M. T. Chakravarty
| >
| > The authors intend this Report to belong to the entire Haskell
| > community, and so we grant permission to copy and distribute it for
| > any purpose, provided that it is reproduced in its entirety,
| > including this Notice. Modified versions of this Report may also be
| > copied and distributed for any purpose, provided that the modified
| > version is clearly presented as such, and that it does not claim to
| > be a definition of the Haskell 98 Foreign Function Interface.
| >
| > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
| > -------
| >
| > Similar communication with Milan Straka:
| > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
| > -------
| >
| >
| >
| > From: Milan Straka <[email protected]>
| > To: Pavel Zelinsky/Boulder/IBM@IBMUS,
| > Date: 12/16/2012 01:44 PM
| > Subject: Re: Question about Haskell_Containers license
| >
| >
| >
| > Dear Pavel Zelinsky,
| >
| > > I working with our attorneys an clarifying the Haskell_Containers
| > > license and I have a question.
| > >
| > > The license clearly states that code derived from Haskell 98 Report
| > > is distributed under the Report license. At the same time, the
| > > Report
| > license
| > > and report itself does not specify code license, but rather entire
| > > report license and modified report.
| > >
| > > So what we are trying to understand:
| > > 1) What specifically code was derived from the Report?
| > > 2) If the derived code was compiled with the following language in
| > > the
| > > license: "modified version is clearly presented as such, and that it
| > > does not claim to be a definition of the Haskell 98 Language"?
| > > Same questions about the "Haskell Foreign..." license.
| >
| > The maintainers of the containers are sure that there is no part of
| > source code of containers that is derived from the Report. They are
| > also sure that there is no part of source code of containers that is
| > derived from Haskell Foreign Function Interface.
| >
| > In order to clarify and simplify the license conditions, we changed
| > the LICENSE in the master repository of containers (available at
| > https://github.com/haskell/containers). It now contains only the GHC
| > license (standard BSD-3 license) and does not mention neither Haskell
| > Report nor Haskell FFI.
| >
| > This hopefully answers your questions. Please do not hesitate to
| > contact us if you have further questions.
| >
| > Best regards,
| > Milan Straka
| >
| > -----------------------------------------------------
|
|
| Thanks
| Ian
|
|
| _______________________________________________
| Cvs-ghc mailing list
| [email protected]
| http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ghc
_______________________________________________
Cvs-ghc mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ghc
