From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,18b00985106487ae X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2004-03-24 04:48:48 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!news.glorb.com!news.cs.univ-paris8.fr!proxad.net!usenet-fr.net!enst.fr!melchior!cuivre.fr.eu.org!melchior.frmug.org!not-for-mail From: Marius Amado Alves Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: [Announce] Mneson : persistent untyped graphs Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 13:01:01 +0000 Organization: Cuivre, Argent, Or Message-ID: References: Reply-To: amado.alves@netcabo.pt NNTP-Posting-Host: lovelace.ada-france.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: melchior.cuivre.fr.eu.org 1080132478 69006 212.85.156.195 (24 Mar 2004 12:47:58 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@melchior.cuivre.fr.eu.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 12:47:58 +0000 (UTC) To: comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org Return-Path: User-Agent: KMail/1.4.3 In-Reply-To: X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20030616-p7 (Debian) at ada-france.org X-BeenThere: comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.4 Precedence: list List-Id: "Gateway to the comp.lang.ada Usenet newsgroup" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:6477 Date: 2004-03-24T13:01:01+00:00 [Regarding SDC Conditions, the licensing terms of Mneson,=20 http://www.liacc.up.pt/~maa/mneson] > In the way that somebody wanted to use it in a non-commercial (GM)GPL > program. If it's non-commercial, just use it. > I don't find any statements about this license. There is some amount of discussion and commentary in SDC and OSI fora. > Neither is it on the OSI list as I can see. It is open source, but no, not OSI-compliant. The SDC license breaches cl= ause=20 6 of the OSD under a certain conservative interpretation of that clause,=20 namely one whereby "restrict" means "requiring a separate deal". It seems= =20 this is the official interpretation by OSI. I'm liberal so I call it open= =20 source. It does not hurt any other clause of the OSD. The commercial-open source clash is still an open issue. Never mind. Just= use=20 it. If it's commercial, tell the authors. They'll cut you a fair deal. Yo= u'll=20 not have to pay unless you get rich, and then it doesn't hurt you. That's= the=20 gist of it. Ignore the legalese. "Just do it."