Cabal package with BSD3 library and LGPL executable?

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
6 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Cabal package with BSD3 library and LGPL executable?

Stephen Tetley-2
Hello all

How do I mark a Cabal package as containing a BSD3 library and an LGPL
executable?

I'm using CppHs (LGPL) from the exe but have no dependencies on it in
the library; as the library might be independently useful I want it to
be BSD3.

As a caveat - I don't want two packages...

Thanks

Stephen
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Cabal package with BSD3 library and LGPL executable?

Ivan Lazar Miljenovic
Stephen Tetley <[hidden email]> writes:
> I'm using CppHs (LGPL) from the exe but have no dependencies on it in
> the library; as the library might be independently useful I want it to
> be BSD3.

Why not look at how cpphs does this itself?  The library is LGPL but the
executable is GPL.

--
Ivan Lazar Miljenovic
[hidden email]
IvanMiljenovic.wordpress.com
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Cabal package with BSD3 library and LGPL executable?

Bulat Ziganshin-2
In reply to this post by Stephen Tetley-2
Hello Stephen,

Thursday, April 29, 2010, 3:45:50 PM, you wrote:

license: custom or so. but future imaginary tools that automatically
checks license of entire library chain will fail


> Hello all

> How do I mark a Cabal package as containing a BSD3 library and an LGPL
> executable?

> I'm using CppHs (LGPL) from the exe but have no dependencies on it in
> the library; as the library might be independently useful I want it to
> be BSD3.

> As a caveat - I don't want two packages...

> Thanks

> Stephen
> _______________________________________________
> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe


--
Best regards,
 Bulat                            mailto:[hidden email]

_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Cabal package with BSD3 library and LGPL executable?

Stephen Tetley-2
In reply to this post by Ivan Lazar Miljenovic
Hi Ivan

Thanks. As far as the Cabal file goes - CppHs is LGPL, its in the
included README that the GPL distinction is noticed. Possibly this
isn't the clearest way of presenting things...


On 29 April 2010 12:52, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Why not look at how cpphs does this itself?  The library is LGPL but the
> executable is GPL.
>
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Cabal package with BSD3 library and LGPL executable?

Ivan Lazar Miljenovic
Stephen Tetley <[hidden email]> writes:
> Thanks. As far as the Cabal file goes - CppHs is LGPL, its in the
> included README that the GPL distinction is noticed. Possibly this
> isn't the clearest way of presenting things...

Well, currently Cabal only lets you specify one license, so your options
are to either use OtherLicense like Bulat suggested and then specify in
the License file what's what, or else do as cpphs does.

--
Ivan Lazar Miljenovic
[hidden email]
IvanMiljenovic.wordpress.com
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Cabal package with BSD3 library and LGPL executable?

Malcolm Wallace

On 29 Apr 2010, at 13:18, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic wrote:

> Stephen Tetley <[hidden email]> writes:
>> Thanks. As far as the Cabal file goes - CppHs is LGPL, its in the
>> included README that the GPL distinction is noticed. Possibly this
>> isn't the clearest way of presenting things...
>
> Well, currently Cabal only lets you specify one license, so your  
> options
> are to either use OtherLicense like Bulat suggested and then specify  
> in
> the License file what's what, or else do as cpphs does.

I suggest submitting a feature request for Cabal: permit separate  
licences on each executable stanza.

Regards,
     Malcolm

_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe