[m-dev.] [m-users.] Closed source Mercury projects on Windows

Zoltan Somogyi zoltan.somogyi at runbox.com
Sun May 27 20:17:56 AEST 2018

On Sun, 27 May 2018 19:57:50 +1000, Mark Brown <mark at mercurylang.org> wrote:
> Yes, I would object, as I think there is a better way to achieve to
> intended effect. Adding a prelude or making other changes is tricky if
> you consider that the document uses negation heavily and is (of
> course!) recursively defined: does "this License", in 2(c) for
> example, refer to the original or the modified version?
> I would like to propose that we release the standard library under
> something like the following license, in addition to the LGPL: "You
> may, without restriction, copy and distribute the Library (or a
> portion or derivative of it) in object code or executable form as
> produced by the Compiler."
> I believe this permits only what was intended all along, namely that
> you should be able to write and distribute Mercury programs and
> libraries without making them open source. Does anyone disagree that
> it would have this effect?

No disagreement here. That would work as well, and even better,
for the reasons you cite.

Do you have a proposal for an actual license text, or a model for us to follow?

By the way, this license would have to apply not just to the standard library,
but also to the trace, browser and mdbcomp directories as well, if we want
to allow the distribution of debuggable executables. I don't think that will be
needed often, but it should be available nevertheless to those who want it.


More information about the developers mailing list