chris angus wrote: > > I was under the impression that Haskell the language (and by inference any > definition > of Haskell) were "free", period. i.e. may be distributed freely in a GNU/GPL > manner. > is this not correct? As Fergus already said, something becomes free only if all of its authors declare it that way. OTOH, I vaguely remeber having seen gmp being used as the bignum implementation in Haskell. Remembering the major legal hassles caused by the presence of gmp in another program several years ago (the combination of the RSAREF libs with gmp in one program (RIPEM) was legally impossible due to diverging licenses of the two libs, which caused the creation of fgmp), I'd like to know what the legal status of the various Haskells is exactly. Ralf
