Re: licensing issues

2001-01-16 Thread Russ Allbery
Bradley M Kuhn [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I don't know if the Preamble I wrote if perfect, because I got very little feedback on it, and all the RFCs this group submitted. Those last two weeks before RFC's were due, the traffic on this list was basically dead, except for me posting revisions

Re: Making sure Perl means Perl (was Re: licensing issues)

2001-01-16 Thread Russ Allbery
Ben Tilly [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: "Bradley M. Kuhn" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The GPL is not a contract, it's a copyright license, just like both the proposed AL-2.0 and the original AL. MY understanding after having talked to a number of licensing experts about it in other places is that

Re: The Do what you want license and enforceability (was Re: licensing issues)

2001-01-16 Thread Russ Allbery
David Grove [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Satisfying Stillman might be good enough for the FSF and ODSN and GNU, but that's quite insubstantial and superficial. (It's Stallman; I wouldn't say anything, but I've seen that twice now.) Note that Stallman is already satisfied with the license on

Re: Making sure Perl means Perl (was Re: licensing issues)

2001-01-16 Thread Ben Tilly
Russ Allbery [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ben Tilly [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: "Bradley M. Kuhn" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] MY understanding after having talked to a number of licensing experts about it in other places is that the GPL is both a copyright license and a contract. For

Re: vtbl-based SVs and sv_setsv()

2001-01-16 Thread David Mitchell
Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote Subject: Re: vtbl-based SVs and sv_setsv() At 06:42 PM 1/13/01 -0800, Benjamin Stuhl wrote: How is setting one SV from another going to be implemented? My (admittedly vague) recollection was that it would be something like void sv_setsv(SV* dest, SV*

interesting read: why the EROS project has switched from C++ to C

2001-01-16 Thread David L. Nicol
http://www.eros-os.org/pipermail/eros-arch/2001-January/002683.html

Re: interesting read: why the EROS project has switched from C++ to C

2001-01-16 Thread Simon Cozens
On Tue, Jan 16, 2001 at 08:49:57PM +, David L. Nicol wrote: http://www.eros-os.org/pipermail/eros-arch/2001-January/002683.html Uhm. That's not *why* they're doing it, it's how they're doing it. Did you get the right URL? I went to a lecture by Knuth today on Literate Programming. He's got

Re: vtbl-based SVs and sv_setsv()

2001-01-16 Thread Dan Sugalski
At 03:30 PM 1/16/01 +, David Mitchell wrote: Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote Subject: Re: vtbl-based SVs and sv_setsv() At 06:42 PM 1/13/01 -0800, Benjamin Stuhl wrote: How is setting one SV from another going to be implemented? My (admittedly vague) recollection was that it

Re: interesting read: why the EROS project has switched from C++ to C

2001-01-16 Thread David L. Nicol
Simon Cozens wrote: On Tue, Jan 16, 2001 at 08:49:57PM +, David L. Nicol wrote: http://www.eros-os.org/pipermail/eros-arch/2001-January/002683.html Uhm. That's not *why* they're doing it, it's how they're doing it. Did you get the right URL? I thought I did -- now that message is

feedback and the license of Perl (was Re: licensing issues)

2001-01-16 Thread Bradley M. Kuhn
bkuhn wrote: I don't know if the Preamble I wrote if perfect, because I got very little feedback on it, and all the RFCs this group submitted. Those last two weeks before RFC's were due, the traffic on this list was basically dead, except for me posting revisions of RFCs. I hope that I