New look for haskell.org: MediaWiki

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
83 messages Options
12345
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

New look for haskell.org: MediaWiki

John Peterson-7
As everyone has noticed during the "making Haskell more open"
discussion, MediaWiki was suggested as a better wiki technology for
haskell.org.  Ashley Yakeley has generously installed MediaWiki and we
would like to migrate the main pages of haskell.org into this wiki.
The migration is not complete - only the front page is finished - but
I'd like to make this public now so that there's time for comments.
In the end, this will allow anyone to come in and fix up the main
haskell.org pages - the people, the projects, the help for beginners,
whatever you want.  Olaf and I will then step back and let the
community work directly on the entire site without having to bother us
(a big advantage!).

This will also impact the old Haskell wiki.  Rather than try to
automatically convert the old wiki to the new one, we're going to ask
the community to come in and do this for us.  In particular, the new
wiki is under the GNU FDL so the licenses are not necessarily
compatible.  We will keep the two wikis going "side by side" for a
while but in the long term I hope all content migrates to MediaWiki
(we won't be deprecating the Trac stuff - this will stay as is).
I believe that MediaWiki is more professional looking and
has a nice separation of documentation and discussion that MoinMoin
lacks.  I hope that this will result in better wiki content and a more
organized site.  Moving content by hand will give us all a chance to
spruce up the existing content as it moves (and get rid of all the
ugly CamelCase page names!).

I expect that it will take another week or so for the rest of the
haskell.org pages to move into the new wiki - at that point we'll
"flip the switch" and take down the old pages (but not the old wiki
yet) and change the main page to point into the MediaWiki.  Content
that isn't being maintained by Olaf and I will stay as before although
I hope that more and more pages will move into the wiki and we won't
have to give out accounts to people on haskell.org just to host
projects.

The new wiki isn't yet visible from the front page but you can find it
at http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/Haskell

For you style sheet gurus, the style sheet itself is also in the wiki
at

http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/MediaWiki:Quiet.css

If anyone wants to help move the main pages over, drop me an email and
I'll coordinate things.

Feel free to start adding stuff to the new wiki.  It won't be visible
to the outside world immediately but you can get it ready for the
switch over.

This isn't a completely "done deal" - there is still time to object to
the whole thing or make suggestions.  Nothing will be visible to the
outside world until we make the switch later.  But I believe this will
result in a much better site and also make life a lot easier for Olaf
and I.  (And I apologize to everyone that's asked for updates to
haskell.org recently - I've been avoiding them to concentrate on
this!).

I'm sure some of the MediaWiki settings still need to be tweaked.
Send me mail if something in the configuration of MediaWiki needs to
be changed.

A big thanks again to Ashley!

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

Re: New look for haskell.org: MediaWiki

Neil Mitchell
> wiki is under the GNU FDL so the licenses are not necessarily
> compatible.

As far as I understand, this means that if I see a sample of code on
the haskell wiki, and just want to "steal" it for my project, I'm not
allowed to, unless I also release my code under the GNU FDL?


And another point, will this wiki be backed up? I am lead to believe
that the existing hawiki isn't, so I keep backups of sections I'm
involved with.

Thanks

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

Re: New look for haskell.org: MediaWiki

John Peterson-7
>> wiki is under the GNU FDL so the licenses are not necessarily
>> compatible.

>As far as I understand, this means that if I see a sample of code on
>the haskell wiki, and just want to "steal" it for my project, I'm not
>allowed to, unless I also release my code under the GNU FDL?

This is something worth debating.  Certainly you can ask the author of
the code for permission to use it but this is an extra burden.  Would
be nice to have a special wiki construct to mark content as posessing
an "extra" license.  The whole license debate should take place as
soon as possible before we get a lot of content in there.  I'm not
wedded to the FDL.

>And another point, will this wiki be backed up? I am lead to believe
>that the existing hawiki isn't, so I keep backups of sections I'm
>involved with.

We back up all of haskell.org except some of the old ghc releases.
That shouldn't be a problem.
_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New look for haskell.org: MediaWiki

Neil Mitchell
> This is something worth debating.  Certainly you can ask the author of
> the code for permission to use it but this is an extra burden.  Would
> be nice to have a special wiki construct to mark content as posessing
> an "extra" license.  The whole license debate should take place as
> soon as possible before we get a lot of content in there.  I'm not
> wedded to the FDL.

Is there any reason for not putting the content under a "do whatever
you want with it" license (i.e. Public Domain or BSD), and then (if
necessary) allowing people to mark certain contributions with
additional restrictions? Especially given GHC is released under the
BSD.

I can't imagine anything anyone would be able to do with the content,
which would be "bad" and would be stopped by something like the FDL.

Thanks

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

License for haskell.org content

John Peterson-7
I believe the scenario that the FDL addresses is that someone
(probably Paul Hudak!) "borrows" massive amounts of stuff from the wiki,
adds his own good stuff, and then publishes a nice book or something
without having to share his additional contribution.  Some people
would like to be sure that their contributions can't be exploited in
this manner.

I'm no license lawyer - the BSD license would work just fine for me
personally but we need to generate some overall agreement on this
issue since everyone who contributes is potentially affected.

   John



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

Re: New look for haskell.org: MediaWiki

Anders Höckersten
In reply to this post by John Peterson-7
sön 2006-01-08 klockan 21:12 -0500 skrev John Peterson:

> >> wiki is under the GNU FDL so the licenses are not necessarily
> >> compatible.
>
> >As far as I understand, this means that if I see a sample of code on
> >the haskell wiki, and just want to "steal" it for my project, I'm not
> >allowed to, unless I also release my code under the GNU FDL?
>
> This is something worth debating.  Certainly you can ask the author of
> the code for permission to use it but this is an extra burden.  Would
> be nice to have a special wiki construct to mark content as posessing
> an "extra" license.  The whole license debate should take place as
> soon as possible before we get a lot of content in there.  I'm not
> wedded to the FDL.
Hmm, here's a quick suggestion. The wiki currently says:
"Content is available under GNU Free Documentation License 1.2."
We change this to:
"All Haskell source code on this page is released into the public
domain. All other content is available under GNU Free Documentation
License 1.2." "Haskell source code" could also be a link to an exact
definition of what is and what is not to be regarded as Haskell source
code, but I think that seems a bit over the top.

It might even be reasonable to release everything into the public
domain. If nothing else, it means we can change the license later if it
ends up being abused (which I personally believe is a rather low risk
scenario).

Regards,
Anders

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

signature.asc (196 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: License for haskell.org content

Ian Lynagh
In reply to this post by John Peterson-7
On Sun, Jan 08, 2006 at 09:31:16PM -0500, John Peterson wrote:
> I believe the scenario that the FDL addresses is that someone
> (probably Paul Hudak!) "borrows" massive amounts of stuff from the wiki,
> adds his own good stuff, and then publishes a nice book or something
> without having to share his additional contribution.  Some people
> would like to be sure that their contributions can't be exploited in
> this manner.

Why not use the GPL, then?

FWIW, the GFDL is considered non-free by Debian[1], so that would mean
any documentation or anything derived from the wiki couldn't be packaged
for Debian.

Apart from the issue of code itself on the wiki, that other people have
already mentioned, presumably you'd also have licence fun if you try to
take surrounding explanatory text to use as haddock docs etc.


Thanks
Ian

[1] http://people.debian.org/~srivasta/Position_Statement.xhtml
    http://home.twcny.rr.com/nerode/neroden/fdl.html

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

Re: License for haskell.org content

Ashley Yakeley
In article <[hidden email]>,
 Ian Lynagh <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Why not use the GPL, then?
>
> FWIW, the GFDL is considered non-free by Debian[1], so that would mean
> any documentation or anything derived from the wiki couldn't be packaged
> for Debian.
>
> Apart from the issue of code itself on the wiki, that other people have
> already mentioned, presumably you'd also have licence fun if you try to
> take surrounding explanatory text to use as haddock docs etc.

Let's discuss it on the wiki:
<http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/HaskellWiki:Community_Portal>

--
Ashley Yakeley, Seattle WA

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

Re: License for haskell.org content

haskell-2
In reply to this post by Ian Lynagh
I have appended the relevant conclusion

Ian Lynagh wrote:

> On Sun, Jan 08, 2006 at 09:31:16PM -0500, John Peterson wrote:
>
>>I believe the scenario that the FDL addresses is that someone
>>(probably Paul Hudak!) "borrows" massive amounts of stuff from the wiki,
>>adds his own good stuff, and then publishes a nice book or something
>>without having to share his additional contribution.  Some people
>>would like to be sure that their contributions can't be exploited in
>>this manner.
>
>
> Why not use the GPL, then?
>
> FWIW, the GFDL is considered non-free by Debian[1], so that would mean
> any documentation or anything derived from the wiki couldn't be packaged
> for Debian.
>
> Apart from the issue of code itself on the wiki, that other people have
> already mentioned, presumably you'd also have licence fun if you try to
> take surrounding explanatory text to use as haddock docs etc.
>
>
> Thanks
> Ian
>
> [1] http://people.debian.org/~srivasta/Position_Statement.xhtml
>     http://home.twcny.rr.com/nerode/neroden/fdl.html
>


==============
Conclusion

It is not possible to borrow text from a GFDL'd manual and incorporate
it in any free software program whatsoever.  This is not a mere
license incompatibility.  It's not just that the GFDL is incompatible
with this or that free software license: it's that it is fundamentally
incompatible with any free software license whatsoever.  So if you
write a new program, and you have no commitments at all about what
license you want to use, saving only that it be a free license, you
cannot include GFDL'd text.

The GNU FDL, as it stands today, does not meet the Debian Free
Software Guidelines.  There are significant problems with the license,
as detailed above; and, as such, we cannot accept works licensed unde
the GNU FDL into our distribution.
==============

Thus defaulting the FDL for all wiki content, including code, is a very bad idea.

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

Re: New look for haskell.org: MediaWiki

Sebastian Sylvan
In reply to this post by Anders Höckersten
On 1/9/06, Anders Höckersten <[hidden email]> wrote:

> sön 2006-01-08 klockan 21:12 -0500 skrev John Peterson:
> > >> wiki is under the GNU FDL so the licenses are not necessarily
> > >> compatible.
> >
> > >As far as I understand, this means that if I see a sample of code on
> > >the haskell wiki, and just want to "steal" it for my project, I'm not
> > >allowed to, unless I also release my code under the GNU FDL?
> >
> > This is something worth debating.  Certainly you can ask the author of
> > the code for permission to use it but this is an extra burden.  Would
> > be nice to have a special wiki construct to mark content as posessing
> > an "extra" license.  The whole license debate should take place as
> > soon as possible before we get a lot of content in there.  I'm not
> > wedded to the FDL.
>
> Hmm, here's a quick suggestion. The wiki currently says:
> "Content is available under GNU Free Documentation License 1.2."
> We change this to:
> "All Haskell source code on this page is released into the public
> domain. All other content is available under GNU Free Documentation
> License 1.2." "Haskell source code" could also be a link to an exact
> definition of what is and what is not to be regarded as Haskell source
> code, but I think that seems a bit over the top.
>
> It might even be reasonable to release everything into the public
> domain. If nothing else, it means we can change the license later if it
> ends up being abused (which I personally believe is a rather low risk
> scenario).
>

Agreed. I don't see a point in having a restrictive license on source code.

Are there any HCI specialists around? I think the web site could do
with some refactoring. I.e. have fewer and more aptly named sections
linked from the front page (do we need both "books and tutorials" as
well as "learning Haskell"?), but I'm not sure exactly how to do it.
If we're making changes anyway, this would be a good time for
significant changes to be implemented. Since the wiki isn't "live" yet
maybe people will feel less "afraid" to make big changes to the front
page without going through a big voting procedure first (it can always
be changed back, and it's not visible from the front page just yet -
so if people don't like it, there's no harm done).

/S

--
Sebastian Sylvan
+46(0)736-818655
UIN: 44640862
_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New look for haskell.org: MediaWiki

Sebastian Sylvan
In reply to this post by John Peterson-7
On 1/9/06, John Peterson <[hidden email]> wrote:

> As everyone has noticed during the "making Haskell more open"
> discussion, MediaWiki was suggested as a better wiki technology for
> haskell.org.  Ashley Yakeley has generously installed MediaWiki and we
> would like to migrate the main pages of haskell.org into this wiki.
> The migration is not complete - only the front page is finished - but
> I'd like to make this public now so that there's time for comments.
> In the end, this will allow anyone to come in and fix up the main
> haskell.org pages - the people, the projects, the help for beginners,
> whatever you want.  Olaf and I will then step back and let the
> community work directly on the entire site without having to bother us
> (a big advantage!).
>
> This will also impact the old Haskell wiki.  Rather than try to
> automatically convert the old wiki to the new one, we're going to ask
> the community to come in and do this for us.  In particular, the new
> wiki is under the GNU FDL so the licenses are not necessarily
> compatible.  We will keep the two wikis going "side by side" for a
> while but in the long term I hope all content migrates to MediaWiki
> (we won't be deprecating the Trac stuff - this will stay as is).
> I believe that MediaWiki is more professional looking and
> has a nice separation of documentation and discussion that MoinMoin
> lacks.  I hope that this will result in better wiki content and a more
> organized site.  Moving content by hand will give us all a chance to
> spruce up the existing content as it moves (and get rid of all the
> ugly CamelCase page names!).
>
> I expect that it will take another week or so for the rest of the
> haskell.org pages to move into the new wiki - at that point we'll
> "flip the switch" and take down the old pages (but not the old wiki
> yet) and change the main page to point into the MediaWiki.  Content
> that isn't being maintained by Olaf and I will stay as before although
> I hope that more and more pages will move into the wiki and we won't
> have to give out accounts to people on haskell.org just to host
> projects.
>
> The new wiki isn't yet visible from the front page but you can find it
> at http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/Haskell
>
> For you style sheet gurus, the style sheet itself is also in the wiki
> at
>
> http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/MediaWiki:Quiet.css
>
> If anyone wants to help move the main pages over, drop me an email and
> I'll coordinate things.
>
> Feel free to start adding stuff to the new wiki.  It won't be visible
> to the outside world immediately but you can get it ready for the
> switch over.
>
> This isn't a completely "done deal" - there is still time to object to
> the whole thing or make suggestions.  Nothing will be visible to the
> outside world until we make the switch later.  But I believe this will
> result in a much better site and also make life a lot easier for Olaf
> and I.  (And I apologize to everyone that's asked for updates to
> haskell.org recently - I've been avoiding them to concentrate on
> this!).
>
> I'm sure some of the MediaWiki settings still need to be tweaked.
> Send me mail if something in the configuration of MediaWiki needs to
> be changed.
>
> A big thanks again to Ashley!
>


Is there a way to typeset Haskell syntax yet?

/S

--
Sebastian Sylvan
+46(0)736-818655
UIN: 44640862
_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: License for haskell.org content

Simon Marlow
In reply to this post by haskell-2
Chris Kuklewicz wrote:

> ==============
> Conclusion
>
> It is not possible to borrow text from a GFDL'd manual and incorporate
> it in any free software program whatsoever.  This is not a mere
> license incompatibility.  It's not just that the GFDL is incompatible
> with this or that free software license: it's that it is fundamentally
> incompatible with any free software license whatsoever.  So if you
> write a new program, and you have no commitments at all about what
> license you want to use, saving only that it be a free license, you
> cannot include GFDL'd text.
>
> The GNU FDL, as it stands today, does not meet the Debian Free
> Software Guidelines.  There are significant problems with the license,
> as detailed above; and, as such, we cannot accept works licensed unde
> the GNU FDL into our distribution.
> ==============
>
> Thus defaulting the FDL for all wiki content, including code, is a very bad idea.

I agree - can we please use BSD or public domain?

Cheers,
        Simon

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

Re: New look for haskell.org: MediaWiki

Duncan Coutts
In reply to this post by John Peterson-7
On Sun, 2006-01-08 at 21:12 -0500, John Peterson wrote:

> >> wiki is under the GNU FDL so the licenses are not necessarily
> >> compatible.
>
> >As far as I understand, this means that if I see a sample of code on
> >the haskell wiki, and just want to "steal" it for my project, I'm not
> >allowed to, unless I also release my code under the GNU FDL?
>
> This is something worth debating.  Certainly you can ask the author of
> the code for permission to use it but this is an extra burden.  Would
> be nice to have a special wiki construct to mark content as posessing
> an "extra" license.  The whole license debate should take place as
> soon as possible before we get a lot of content in there.  I'm not
> wedded to the FDL.

I get the impression that media wiki has some support for marking things
with Creative Commons licenses (and perhaps others) os maybe that'd help
(you often see this for images on Wikipedia). If people were posting
snippets from a GPL program then they could be marked as such.

This is somewhat different from what the default should be for small
snippets.

Duncan

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

Re: Re: License for haskell.org content

Ketil Malde-2
In reply to this post by Simon Marlow
Simon Marlow <[hidden email]> writes:

>> Thus defaulting the FDL for all wiki content, including code, is a
>> very bad idea.

> I agree - can we please use BSD or public domain?

Another option is the Open Publication License, which requires
acknowledgement (but little else).  Anyway, I think a point that
should be taken into consideration is that you can usually tighten the
licensing later on, while making it more liberal can be difficult.

-k
--
If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of giants

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

Re: New look for haskell.org: MediaWiki

Gour-2
In reply to this post by John Peterson-7
On Sun, 2006-01-08 at 19:52 -0500, John Peterson wrote:

> This isn't a completely "done deal" - there is still time to object to
> the whole thing or make suggestions.  Nothing will be visible to the
> outside world until we make the switch later.  But I believe this will
> result in a much better site and also make life a lot easier for Olaf
> and I.  (And I apologize to everyone that's asked for updates to
> haskell.org recently - I've been avoiding them to concentrate on
> this!).

As far as I understand Simon's proposal, it was not only about 'better'
wiki system and that's why I proposed something like Drupal which offers
more than a wiki (forums, Collaborative Book, Blogger API support,
Content syndication,Web based administration... see
http://drupal.org/features), so I wonder what's wrong with Drupal (or
some other CMS) and/or if having just a wiki is enough?

Sincerely,
Gour


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

signature.asc (196 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re: License for haskell.org content

Udo Stenzel
In reply to this post by Ketil Malde-2
Ketil Malde wrote:
> Another option is the Open Publication License, which requires
> acknowledgement (but little else).

...which would mean that whenever you rearrange something inside the
wiki, you'd have to drag signatures around (and god forbid you
accidentally drop a single one).  The only way out would be to assign
copyright of contributions to some central entity, so the attribution
would always be "(C) The Haskell Wiki Foundation" or something.  Anyone
willing to found or find a suitable non-profit organisation?

Sounds like a stupid idea?  Thought so.  A wiki should be public domain,
plain and simple.  (Put contributions with a different license somewhere
else and link to them.  No big deal.)


Udo.
--
People with great minds talk about ideas.
People with ordinary minds talk about things.
People with small minds talk about other people.
        -- Eleanor Roosevelt

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

signature.asc (196 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New look for haskell.org: MediaWiki (now: Drupal)

John Peterson-7
In reply to this post by Gour-2
The reason that MediaWiki was installed on haskell.org is that people
that know how to install and use MediaWiki (Ashley and others)
volunteered to do all the work.  If we want to move up to Drupal we
need someone that is willing to install, maintain, and transfer
content.  If this is something you want to do let me know.  

MediaWiki addresses many of the issues we've had with haskell.org but
it isn't meant to be the only possible way forward.

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

haskell.org Public Domain

Ashley Yakeley
In reply to this post by Udo Stenzel
In article <[hidden email]>,
 Udo Stenzel <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Sounds like a stupid idea?  Thought so.  A wiki should be public domain,
> plain and simple.  (Put contributions with a different license somewhere
> else and link to them.  No big deal.)

There seems to be a consensus for public domain both here and on the
wiki page.
<http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/HaskellWiki:Community_Portal>

Does anyone have any objections to putting everything in the public
domain?

--
Ashley Yakeley, Seattle WA

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

Re: haskell.org Public Domain

Cale Gibbard
On 09/01/06, Ashley Yakeley <[hidden email]> wrote:

> In article <[hidden email]>,
>  Udo Stenzel <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Sounds like a stupid idea?  Thought so.  A wiki should be public domain,
> > plain and simple.  (Put contributions with a different license somewhere
> > else and link to them.  No big deal.)
>
> There seems to be a consensus for public domain both here and on the
> wiki page.
> <http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/HaskellWiki:Community_Portal>
>
> Does anyone have any objections to putting everything in the public
> domain?
>

As long as that's just the default and not required of course. It
might be nice to at least include some disclaimers of warranty.

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

Re: haskell.org Public Domain

Glynn Clements
In reply to this post by Ashley Yakeley

Ashley Yakeley wrote:

> > Sounds like a stupid idea?  Thought so.  A wiki should be public domain,
> > plain and simple.  (Put contributions with a different license somewhere
> > else and link to them.  No big deal.)
>
> There seems to be a consensus for public domain both here and on the
> wiki page.
> <http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/HaskellWiki:Community_Portal>
>
> Does anyone have any objections to putting everything in the public
> domain?

Insisting that everything is in the public domain prevents the
inclusion of third-party content, unless either:

a) that content is also in the public domain (which is unusual; even
content which is "freely" redistributable usually has some kind of
restriction, even if it's only an acknowledgement requirement), or

b) you can obtain a specific exemption from its author (assuming that
you can actually identify and locate the author, which isn't always
easy for projects with a long history and many contributors).

--
Glynn Clements <[hidden email]>
_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
12345