Perhaps it would be best if .cabal allowed to have more than one license listed.
Another solution would be to use custom field, for example: License: GPL x-Other-License: Commercial, see License-Commercial.txt All best, Krzysztof Skrzętnicki On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 11:44 AM, David Sorokin <david.soro...@gmail.com>wrote: > Thanks Thu, > > I agree with you. Just I don't know what to write in the license field of > the .cabal file: GPL or OtherLicense. The both choices seem correct to me > and misleading at the same time. > > Cheers, > David > > 30.07.2013, в 12:53, Vo Minh Thu написал(а): > > > 2013/7/30 David Sorokin <david.soro...@gmail.com>: > >> Hi, Cafe! > >> > >> Probably, it was asked before but I could not find an answer with help > of Google. > >> > >> I have a library which is hosted on Hackage. The library is licensed > under BSD3. It is a very specialized library for a small target group. Now > I'm going to relicense it and release a new version already under the > dual-license: GPLv3 and commercial. In most cases GPL will be sufficient as > this is not a library in common sense. > >> > >> Can I specify the GPL license in the .cabal file, or should I write > OtherLicense? > >> > >> I'm going to add the information about dual-licensing in the > description section of the .cabal file, though. > > > > Although you can indeed license your software under different > > licences, in the case of your question it doesn't seem to be a concern > > with Hackage: > > > > The license displayed on Hackage is the one for the corresponding > > .cabal file (or at least I think it is). So you issue your new version > > with the changed license, the new version is available with the new > > license, the old versions are still available with the old license. > > Everything is fine. > > > > Now about the dual licensing. It seems it is again not a problem with > > Hackage: you are not granting through Hackage such a commercial > > license. I guess you provide it upon request (for some money). I.e. > > when I download your library from Hackage, I receive it under the > > terms of the BSD (or GPL) license you have chosen, not under a > > commercial license that I would have to receive through other means. > > > > Otherwise the semantic of the license field on Hackage would mean the > > library is available under such and such licenses, which are not > > granted to you when you download the library on Hackage. Only when you > > download the package you can actually find the licensing terms (e.g. > > in the LICENSE file). But this seems unlikely to me. > > > > Cheers, > > Thu > > > _______________________________________________ > Haskell-Cafe mailing list > Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe >
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe