Re: Using stringize and string concatenation in ghc preprocessing

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
37 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Using stringize and string concatenation in ghc preprocessing

Ben Franksen
Am 20.08.2016 um 20:33 schrieb Brandon Allbery:
> You might want to look at cpphs as an alternative preprocessor. There are
> some ancient K&R-era hacks that could be used if absolutely necessary, but
> cpphs should be a much simpler and cleaner solution.

Is there any reason /not/ to prefer cpphs over cpp? If not, why does
anyone still use cpp for Haskell?

Cheers
Ben
--
"Make it so they have to reboot after every typo." ― Scott Adams

_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
To (un)subscribe, modify options or view archives go to:
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Only members subscribed via the mailman list are allowed to post.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Using stringize and string concatenation in ghc preprocessing

Brandon Allbery
On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 5:39 PM, Ben Franksen <[hidden email]> wrote:
Am 20.08.2016 um 20:33 schrieb Brandon Allbery:
> You might want to look at cpphs as an alternative preprocessor. There are
> some ancient K&R-era hacks that could be used if absolutely necessary, but
> cpphs should be a much simpler and cleaner solution.

Is there any reason /not/ to prefer cpphs over cpp? If not, why does
anyone still use cpp for Haskell?

Licensing. 

--
brandon s allbery kf8nh                               sine nomine associates
[hidden email]                                  [hidden email]
unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonad        http://sinenomine.net

_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
To (un)subscribe, modify options or view archives go to:
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Only members subscribed via the mailman list are allowed to post.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Using stringize and string concatenation in ghc preprocessing

Ben Franksen
Am 18.01.2017 um 23:43 schrieb Brandon Allbery:

> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 5:39 PM, Ben Franksen <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> Am 20.08.2016 um 20:33 schrieb Brandon Allbery:
>>> You might want to look at cpphs as an alternative preprocessor. There are
>>> some ancient K&R-era hacks that could be used if absolutely necessary,
>> but
>>> cpphs should be a much simpler and cleaner solution.
>>
>> Is there any reason /not/ to prefer cpphs over cpp? If not, why does
>> anyone still use cpp for Haskell?
>>
>
> Licensing.

http://projects.haskell.org/cpphs/ says:

"""
License: The library modules in cpphs are distributed under the terms of
the LGPL (see file LICENCE-LGPL for more details). If that's a problem
for you, contact me to make other arrangements. The application module
'cpphs.hs' itself is GPL (see file LICENCE-GPL). If you have a
commercial use for cpphs and find the terms of the (L)GPL too onerous,
you can instead choose to distribute unmodified binaries (not source),
under the terms of LICENCE-commercial
"""

I can't see how this would inconvenience anyone.

Besides, GNU's cpp is certainly GPL licensed; I wonder why different
standards are applied here.

Cheers
Ben
--
"Make it so they have to reboot after every typo." ― Scott Adams

_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
To (un)subscribe, modify options or view archives go to:
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Only members subscribed via the mailman list are allowed to post.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Using stringize and string concatenation in ghc preprocessing

Richard A. O'Keefe


On 19/01/17 12:04 PM, Ben Franksen wrote:
> Besides, GNU's cpp is certainly GPL licensed; I wonder why different
> standards are applied here.

GNU's cpp is not the only one around.
I have the Sun/Oracle compilers, which don't use GNU cpp;
I had the Intel compilers, which don't use GNU cpp;
there's the preprocessor that comes with lcc, which isn't GNU cpp;
and I also have mcpp and warp (in D) and jcpp (in Java).
There must be others out there.



_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
To (un)subscribe, modify options or view archives go to:
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Only members subscribed via the mailman list are allowed to post.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Using stringize and string concatenation in ghc preprocessing

Brandon Allbery

On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 8:17 PM, Richard A. O'Keefe <[hidden email]> wrote:
On 19/01/17 12:04 PM, Ben Franksen wrote:
Besides, GNU's cpp is certainly GPL licensed; I wonder why different
standards are applied here.

GNU's cpp is not the only one around.

Which gets at the real point: these compilers come with the system or are otherwise provided by the vendor for more general purposes. (If someone downloaded icc and used its cpp, monitoring license compliance is their problem). Someone with corporate lawyers to satisfy may well need to avoid GPL, so they would use neither gcc nor cpphs (but the alternatives after that are few on the ground, given that clang's cpp doesn't like being abused for Haskell source...).


--
brandon s allbery kf8nh                               sine nomine associates
[hidden email]                                  [hidden email]
unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonad        http://sinenomine.net

_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
To (un)subscribe, modify options or view archives go to:
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Only members subscribed via the mailman list are allowed to post.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Using stringize and string concatenation in ghc preprocessing

Ben Franksen
In reply to this post by Richard A. O'Keefe
Am 19.01.2017 um 02:17 schrieb Richard A. O'Keefe:
> On 19/01/17 12:04 PM, Ben Franksen wrote:
>> Besides, GNU's cpp is certainly GPL licensed; I wonder why different
>> standards are applied here.
>
> GNU's cpp is not the only one around.

I did not mean to suggest that.

> I have the Sun/Oracle compilers, which don't use GNU cpp;
> I had the Intel compilers, which don't use GNU cpp;
> there's the preprocessor that comes with lcc, which isn't GNU cpp;
> and I also have mcpp and warp (in D) and jcpp (in Java).
> There must be others out there.

Fine. What is the point you want to make with that listing?

Cheers
Ben
--
"Make it so they have to reboot after every typo." ― Scott Adams

_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
To (un)subscribe, modify options or view archives go to:
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Only members subscribed via the mailman list are allowed to post.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Using stringize and string concatenation in ghc preprocessing

Ben Franksen
In reply to this post by Brandon Allbery
Am 19.01.2017 um 02:21 schrieb Brandon Allbery:

> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 8:17 PM, Richard A. O'Keefe <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> On 19/01/17 12:04 PM, Ben Franksen wrote:
>>
>>> Besides, GNU's cpp is certainly GPL licensed; I wonder why different
>>> standards are applied here.
>>>
>>
>> GNU's cpp is not the only one around.
>
> Which gets at the real point: these compilers come with the system or are
> otherwise provided by the vendor for more general purposes. (If someone
> downloaded icc and used its cpp, monitoring license compliance is their
> problem).

> Someone with corporate lawyers to satisfy may well need to avoid
> GPL, so they would use neither gcc nor cpphs

This would be a problem only if they anticipate a need to distibute
modified versions of cpphs or other sorts of work derived from it. How
probable is that? To re-iterate, GPL in no way restricts usage, not even
modification (for whatever purpose), merely the re-distribution of
derived work. The whole argument strikes me as a transparent attempt to
discredit GPL licensed software, brough forward by certain parties that,
for political reasons, dislike GPL and want to spead FUD against it.

Cheers
Ben
--
"Make it so they have to reboot after every typo." ― Scott Adams

_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
To (un)subscribe, modify options or view archives go to:
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Only members subscribed via the mailman list are allowed to post.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Using stringize and string concatenation in ghc preprocessing

Brandon Allbery
On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 11:14 AM, Ben Franksen <[hidden email]> wrote:
This would be a problem only if they anticipate a need to distibute
modified versions of cpphs or other sorts of work derived from it.

Corporate lawyers are not interested in *your* interpretation of GPL, only their own. And most of them won't touch GPL3 or even LGPL3 with a ten foot pole. Shouting your interpretation of it at them won't change anything.

--
brandon s allbery kf8nh                               sine nomine associates
[hidden email]                                  [hidden email]
unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonad        http://sinenomine.net

_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
To (un)subscribe, modify options or view archives go to:
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Only members subscribed via the mailman list are allowed to post.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Using stringize and string concatenation in ghc preprocessing

Richard A. O'Keefe
In reply to this post by Ben Franksen
> Am 19.01.2017 um 02:17 schrieb Richard A. O'Keefe:
>> On 19/01/17 12:04 PM, Ben Franksen wrote:
>>> Besides, GNU's cpp is certainly GPL licensed; I wonder why different
>>> standards are applied here.
>>
>> GNU's cpp is not the only one around.
>
> I did not mean to suggest that.
> Fine. What is the point you want to make with that listing?

I read you as saying that it was inappropriate to use any
other licence before GCC's preprocessor is GPL-licensed,
and I was making the point that alternatives (including
proprietary and free) with different license are available.



_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
To (un)subscribe, modify options or view archives go to:
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Only members subscribed via the mailman list are allowed to post.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Using stringize and string concatenation in ghc preprocessing

Richard A. O'Keefe
In reply to this post by Ben Franksen
> Am 19.01.2017 um 02:17 schrieb Richard A. O'Keefe:
>> On 19/01/17 12:04 PM, Ben Franksen wrote:
>>> Besides, GNU's cpp is certainly GPL licensed; I wonder why different
>>> standards are applied here.
>>
>> GNU's cpp is not the only one around.
>
> I did not mean to suggest that.
> Fine. What is the point you want to make with that listing?

I read you as saying that it was inappropriate to use any
other licence before GCC's preprocessor is GPL-licensed,
and I was making the point that alternatives (including
proprietary and free) with different licences are available.



_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
To (un)subscribe, modify options or view archives go to:
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Only members subscribed via the mailman list are allowed to post.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Using stringize and string concatenation in ghc preprocessing

Richard A. O'Keefe
In reply to this post by Ben Franksen
> Am 19.01.2017 um 02:17 schrieb Richard A. O'Keefe:
>> On 19/01/17 12:04 PM, Ben Franksen wrote:
>>> Besides, GNU's cpp is certainly GPL licensed; I wonder why different
>>> standards are applied here.
>>
>> GNU's cpp is not the only one around.
>
> I did not mean to suggest that.
> Fine. What is the point you want to make with that listing?

I read you as saying that it was inappropriate to use any
other licence because GCC's preprocessor is GPL-licensed,
and I was making the point that alternatives (including
proprietary and free) with different licences are available.



_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
To (un)subscribe, modify options or view archives go to:
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Only members subscribed via the mailman list are allowed to post.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Using stringize and string concatenation in ghc preprocessing

Ben Franksen
In reply to this post by Brandon Allbery
Am 22.01.2017 um 17:18 schrieb Brandon Allbery:
> On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 11:14 AM, Ben Franksen <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> This would be a problem only if they anticipate a need to distibute
>> modified versions of cpphs or other sorts of work derived from it.
>>
>
> Corporate lawyers are not interested in *your* interpretation of GPL, only
> their own.

It is not "my" intepretation, rather it is the "official" interpretation
of the GPL according to the people who created it (the FSF).

> And most of them won't touch GPL3 or even LGPL3 with a ten foot
> pole. Shouting your interpretation of it at them won't change anything.

Do you have any evidence to support this statement? I ask because if
what you say is true, most companies willfully and severely restrict
their options. For instance, a company that employs lawyers who "won't
touch GPL3 or even LGPL3 with a ten foot pole" could not use Linux in
any way (the kernel is GPL licensed), nor e.g. Android (based on Linux
kernel).

I have no data on how many companies in the world use Linux. What I do
know is that many companies, even big corporations, actually support the
Linux kernel with code (e.g. drivers), thus triggering the most
restricting clauses in the GPL. For instance, Volkswagen AG has
contributed socketcan to the kernel.

Cheers
Ben
--
"Make it so they have to reboot after every typo." ― Scott Adams

_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
To (un)subscribe, modify options or view archives go to:
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Only members subscribed via the mailman list are allowed to post.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Using stringize and string concatenation in ghc preprocessing

Ben Franksen
In reply to this post by Richard A. O'Keefe
Am 23.01.2017 um 01:48 schrieb [hidden email]:

>> Am 19.01.2017 um 02:17 schrieb Richard A. O'Keefe:
>>> On 19/01/17 12:04 PM, Ben Franksen wrote:
>>>> Besides, GNU's cpp is certainly GPL licensed; I wonder why different
>>>> standards are applied here.
>>>
>>> GNU's cpp is not the only one around.
>>
>> I did not mean to suggest that.
>> Fine. What is the point you want to make with that listing?
>
> I read you as saying that it was inappropriate to use any
> other licence before GCC's preprocessor is GPL-licensed,
> and I was making the point that alternatives (including
> proprietary and free) with different license are available.

Right. So my argument about GNU cpp was not valid, since, in principle
at least, there are non-GPL alternatives.

How does that work in practice? What are people using on e.g. Windows as
GHC's C-backend to avoid GPL? I venture that the native (Microsoft's) C
compiler does not enter the picture here, it does not even support C90.
Perhaps they use the LLVM backend?

Cheers
Ben
--
"Make it so they have to reboot after every typo." ― Scott Adams

_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
To (un)subscribe, modify options or view archives go to:
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Only members subscribed via the mailman list are allowed to post.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Using stringize and string concatenation in ghc preprocessing

Brandon Allbery
In reply to this post by Ben Franksen

On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 2:55 PM, Ben Franksen <[hidden email]> wrote:
Do you have any evidence to support this statement? I ask because if
what you say is true, most companies willfully and severely restrict
their options.

I suppose Apple isn't evidence. Perhaps Apple is a figment of my imagination? And no, they are not a singleton.

Additionally, it's not hard to find past discussions of integrating cpphs into ghc, which were effectively blocked by many people reporting that corporate lawyers would force them to stop using ghc if it happened.

GPL3 is *toxic* in the corporate world. Doesn't matter what RMS and co. claim outside the license itself; what decides reality is what lawyers determine from the working of the license, and their willingness to face court challenges based thereon.

--
brandon s allbery kf8nh                               sine nomine associates
[hidden email]                                  [hidden email]
unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonad        http://sinenomine.net

_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
To (un)subscribe, modify options or view archives go to:
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Only members subscribed via the mailman list are allowed to post.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Using stringize and string concatenation in ghc preprocessing

Sven Panne-2
In reply to this post by Ben Franksen
2017-01-23 20:55 GMT+01:00 Ben Franksen <[hidden email]>:
It is not "my" intepretation, rather it is the "official" interpretation
of the GPL according to the people who created it (the FSF).

But "official" is not the same as "is accepted by any court". Of course the people who created the license have a biased view, but so do company lawyers (and the rest of the management): The "safe mode" for them is to say "no", you can't be blamed then and don't do anything wrong, at least not immediately. As a lot of things in life, such decisions are not driven by desire to improve the well-being of a greater entity (company/society/...), but purely personal interests.
 
Do you have any evidence to support this statement?

Something like this happened to me at least three times in my career, and even if it's not direct refusal to accept such licenses, there are quite a few companies (especially bigger ones) which require a *lenghty* process to get SW with such licenses approved. This doesn't exactly encourage engineers to take that route...

 
I ask because if what you say is true, most companies willfully and severely restrict
their options.

There is no such thing as "the company", basically people are acting as individuals (see above).
 
For instance, a company that employs lawyers who "won't
touch GPL3 or even LGPL3 with a ten foot pole" could not use Linux in
any way (the kernel is GPL licensed), nor e.g. Android (based on Linux
kernel). [...]

That's not true: If you take $$$ and e.g. license your RedHat Enterprise Linux/SLES/..., you have a legal entity (RedHat, SuSE, ...) which takes the responsibility before court, not *your* company. So that's the easy way for lawyers. Alas, there is no GHC/cpphs company of sufficient size for this to work in our case.

 Disclaimer: I don't say that this is a perfect situation, but it's just what I've experienced. Just shouting "GPL is fine, you can use it!" ignores the darker side of company life...

Cheers,
   S.

_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
To (un)subscribe, modify options or view archives go to:
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Only members subscribed via the mailman list are allowed to post.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Using stringize and string concatenation in ghc preprocessing

Bardur Arantsson-2
On 2017-01-23 21:21, Sven Panne wrote:
> If you take $$$ and e.g. license your RedHat Enterprise Linux/SLES/...,
> you have a legal entity (RedHat, SuSE, ...) which takes the
> responsibility before court, not *your* company.

This is not true, unless there's some sort of idemnification clause in
your license/contract with RH/SuSE/etc. (Of course you're not liable for
copyright infrement done by RH/SuSE/etc., but you still have to comply
with all licenses of whatever you derive your works from.) Such clauses
are pretty rare and is basically in the realm of insurance.

Regards,

_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
To (un)subscribe, modify options or view archives go to:
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Only members subscribed via the mailman list are allowed to post.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Using stringize and string concatenation in ghc preprocessing

Ben Franksen
In reply to this post by Brandon Allbery
Am 23.01.2017 um 21:15 schrieb Brandon Allbery:

> On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 2:55 PM, Ben Franksen <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> Do you have any evidence to support this statement? I ask because if
>> what you say is true, most companies willfully and severely restrict
>> their options.
>>
>
> I suppose Apple isn't evidence. Perhaps Apple is a figment of my
> imagination? And no, they are not a singleton.

Are you saying that Apple's lawyers are afraid of litigation because of
GPL infringement? I very much doubt that. I think Apple is just opposed
to GPL because their business model is built around proprietary hard-
and software. They are against GPL because they *do* want to just grab
stuff and sell it as closed source.

> Additionally, it's not hard to find past discussions of integrating cpphs
> into ghc, which were effectively blocked by many people reporting that
> corporate lawyers would force them to stop using ghc if it happened.

I have no doubt that there are companies and/or lawyers like that. What
I doubt is that this is the overwhelming majority, as you seemed to
suggest ("...most corporate lawyers..."). All the evidence you and Sven
provided is merely anecdotal.

> GPL3 is *toxic* in the corporate world.

The wording you choose to express this suggests that either you agree
with this point of view or else have listened too much to the wrong
people, adopting their jargon.

> Doesn't matter what RMS and co.
> claim outside the license itself; what decides reality is what lawyers
> determine from the working of the license, and their willingness to face
> court challenges based thereon.

Are there, at least, public statements on the net (by such lawyers),
preferably with some sort of justification?

Cheers
Ben
--
"Make it so they have to reboot after every typo." ― Scott Adams

_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
To (un)subscribe, modify options or view archives go to:
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Only members subscribed via the mailman list are allowed to post.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Using stringize and string concatenation in ghc preprocessing

Brandon Allbery

On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 4:10 PM, Ben Franksen <[hidden email]> wrote:
I have no doubt that there are companies and/or lawyers like that. What
I doubt is that this is the overwhelming majority, as you seemed to
suggest ("...most corporate lawyers..."). All the evidence you and Sven
provided is merely anecdotal.

Mrrr. I was trying to back that off a bit; the real issue is not that it's "most", it's "enough to make ghc problematic". The last thread about cpphs (quick search gets me https://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-devs/2015-May/009106.html from the middle of it and containing a decent summary) indicated that a significant number of high profile Haskell users would be forced to drop Haskell if cpphs went into ghc, because they'd have to face the uphill battle of getting corporate lawyers to okay it again.

"Just do it and fix the fallout afterward" is not a solution; once in, those lawyers would think twice about reinstating ghc if it were subsequently removed, because that's the safe stance legally speaking.

--
brandon s allbery kf8nh                               sine nomine associates
[hidden email]                                  [hidden email]
unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonad        http://sinenomine.net

_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
To (un)subscribe, modify options or view archives go to:
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Only members subscribed via the mailman list are allowed to post.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Using stringize and string concatenation in ghc preprocessing

Ben Franksen
In reply to this post by Sven Panne-2
Am 23.01.2017 um 21:21 schrieb Sven Panne:

> 2017-01-23 20:55 GMT+01:00 Ben Franksen <[hidden email]>:
>
>> It is not "my" intepretation, rather it is the "official" interpretation
>> of the GPL according to the people who created it (the FSF).
>
> But "official" is not the same as "is accepted by any court". Of course the
> people who created the license have a biased view, but so do company
> lawyers (and the rest of the management): The "safe mode" for them is to
> say "no", you can't be blamed then and don't do anything wrong, at least
> not immediately. As a lot of things in life, such decisions are not driven
> by desire to improve the well-being of a greater entity
> (company/society/...), but purely personal interests.

I can understand how this works. However, I would think that this is
also a matter of weighing risks against opportunities. I would really
like to talk to such a lawyer (in private) and ask him to explain to me
how he thinks the GPL could cause legal risk for a company that merely
uses the software.

>> Do you have any evidence to support this statement?
>
> Something like this happened to me at least three times in my career, and
> even if it's not direct refusal to accept such licenses, there are quite a
> few companies (especially bigger ones) which require a *lenghty* process to
> get SW with such licenses approved. This doesn't exactly encourage
> engineers to take that route...

Ok, still anecdotal evidence. Yes, there are such companies/lawyers.
Perhaps this is enough to justify caution. I would still like to see
some numbers.

>> I ask because if what you say is true, most companies willfully and
>> severely restrict
>> their options.
>
> There is no such thing as "the company", basically people are acting as
> individuals (see above).

Ah, well. So if the CEO thinks opportunities trump the risks he/she
*could* just overrule whatever the lawyers say.

>> For instance, a company that employs lawyers who "won't
>> touch GPL3 or even LGPL3 with a ten foot pole" could not use Linux in
>> any way (the kernel is GPL licensed), nor e.g. Android (based on Linux
>> kernel). [...]
>>
>
> That's not true: If you take $$$ and e.g. license your RedHat Enterprise
> Linux/SLES/..., you have a legal entity (RedHat, SuSE, ...) which takes the
> responsibility before court, not *your* company. So that's the easy way for
> lawyers. Alas, there is no GHC/cpphs company of sufficient size for this to
> work in our case.

I really don't understand that kind of logic. In particular, how exactly
does getting GPL'd software from a vendor sich as RedHat allow the
client to shift legal risks to that vendor? And what about RedHat
themselves? Wouldn't *their* lawyers warn them against taking on such
risks? This just doesn't make any sense to me.

>  Disclaimer: I don't say that this is a perfect situation, but it's just
> what I've experienced. Just shouting "GPL is fine, you can use it!" ignores
> the darker side of company life...

Perhaps. I suspect that whatever corporate lawyers may say against GPL
is simply irrational fear and stupid conservatism.

BTW, are there *any* examples of court decisions against companies
because of GPL infringements that may lend substance to these vague
claims of terrible risks when using GPL licensed software?

Cheers
Ben
--
"Make it so they have to reboot after every typo." ― Scott Adams

_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
To (un)subscribe, modify options or view archives go to:
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Only members subscribed via the mailman list are allowed to post.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Using stringize and string concatenation in ghc preprocessing

Brandon Allbery

On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 4:42 PM, Ben Franksen <[hidden email]> wrote:
Perhaps. I suspect that whatever corporate lawyers may say against GPL
is simply irrational fear and stupid conservatism.

People aren't programs. Irrational fear and stupid conservatism are *reality*; if you don't factor them in, you lose. And you can't undo your mistakes by reverting.

--
brandon s allbery kf8nh                               sine nomine associates
[hidden email]                                  [hidden email]
unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonad        http://sinenomine.net

_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
To (un)subscribe, modify options or view archives go to:
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Only members subscribed via the mailman list are allowed to post.
12