search

sapristi / easy_logging

Logging module for OCaml
Mozilla Public License 2.0
10 stars 0 forks source link

GPL license -> LGPL? #4

Closed aryx closed 3 years ago

aryx commented 3 years ago

Using the GPL license for a library is quite invasive. Did you do it on purpose @sapristi ? Most OCaml libraries are distributed under the LGPL (and many of them have an addition on about linking). See for example https://github.com/returntocorp/semgrep/blob/develop/LICENSE

aryx commented 3 years ago

see what's github says about the LGPL: "GNU Lesser General Public License v2.1 Primarily used for software libraries, the GNU LGPL requires that derived works be licensed under the same license, but works that only link to it do not fall under this restriction"

sapristi commented 3 years ago

Hello, yes this was on purpose. My main view on the subject is that I wouldn't feel very comfortable with the library being used in closed source programs.

Do you have a precise use-case where the GPL license is problematic ?

aryx commented 3 years ago

Well I'm working for a company where some parts of our work is open source (the OCaml program I'm developping, semgrep.dev), and other parts are closed source, and our lawyers hate the GPL ... It's like kryptonite to them, so if you use a GPL library, even in your open source code, it's like a huge red signals for them. I might have to switch to another logging library then ... Thanks for your work anyway!

sapristi commented 3 years ago

Hmm ok I will see what I can do about that, for the next ( soon I hope ! ) release of easy-logging.

sapristi commented 3 years ago

The release 0.8.2 is pending in opam, with Mozilla Public License 2.0 (basically allows using the library however you want, only modifications are subject to the license).

aryx commented 3 years ago

Fantastic! Merci!

dra27 commented 3 years ago

In b4d89023dcf68fb104b7fe8c701b48c10d27 you switched the LICENSE file to MPL but all the source files still state GPL.

sapristi commented 3 years ago

@dra27 thanks for the report. I have updated the files in master, the opam publication seem to be failing, but this should be fixed in a few days ;)

dra27 commented 3 years ago

the opam publication seem to be failing

Looking briefly at the PR, you have (lang dune 1.8.0) in your dune-project file which should be (lang dune 1.8) which will clear the lint errors - there's obviously a lowerbound missing on one of your dependencies, but I expect that one of the opam-repo maintainers will recognise that one and push a fix!

sapristi commented 3 years ago

Thanks for the feedback on the opam PR, that's most definitely useful ;)

sapristi commented 3 years ago

@dra27 0.8.2 was merged !