[Clo-devel] We're getting feedback!

[Nikodemus Siivola]

On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 05:16:03PM +0200, Stig E Sandoe wrote:

> | How about, at the "About this site": 
> | 
> |   "This site is currently paid for and maintained by
> |   <insert-our-names-here>"
> 
> That would clarify things, and let users know who is providing the
> service.  Openness is good. 

Do you think the simple name-list is sufficent, or should it elaborate
on the backgound and current working order?

> | > - What open source/free projects can get hosting?  DFSG?  Wider than
> | > DFSG?  Stricter than DFSG? 'Hosting decisions are made on case-by-case
> | > basis.' is fine, but some examples of accepted licences would be nice.
> | 
> | I think DFSG sounds reasonable.  Any reason not to restrict it to DFSG?
> 
> DFSG is fairly well-known and respected. 

I think we can mention DSFG, with some caveats:

 * Licenses (such as LGPL) invoking distiction between dynamic and
   static linking are generally horribly confusing when confronted
   with Common Lisp way of loading code.

 * The same "horribly confusing" applies to LLGPL as well, with the
   addition the FSF seems to have trouble with the prelude.

 * We reserve the right to host non-DSFG free projects if we feel that
   it is appropriate. Examples include projects for which non-DSFG license
   is more suitable, and possible sponsorship.

Naturally, this would not apply to any cclan mirror that we may host,
or to any cclan upload mechanism we may provide: just to "normal"
project hosting, which may or may not include the cclan upload
facility.

> As I suggested on #lisp, a system where each project can make a
> cclan/ directory in the project-root, and some script is run as
> cron-job that gathers files from cclan/ for CCLAN-inclusion might be
> the best solution.  It will probably also make cclan and cl.net work
> well together and be attractive for people with lisp packages.
> CCLAN is lacking a central upload hub where (DFSG) lisp-projects can
> easily join CCLAN and upload updates and packages.

Sounds reasonable.

> http://sourceforge.net/docman/display_doc.php?docid=6049&group_id=1

Thanks for the link! Unfortunately I wont have much more time untill
monday, so I'll have to defer the reading & thinking. :/

Cheers,

 -- Nikodemus
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://mailman.common-lisp.net/pipermail/clo-devel/attachments/20030822/31df3ff6/attachment.sig>