[slime-devel] Re: Slime licence problems: a possible solution

[Peter Van Eynde]

Luke Gorrie <luke <at> synap.se> writes:

> > Alceste Scalas noticed that the problematic xref.lisp file is only used
> > by clisp, so removing it becomes a possibility. It would be painfull for
> > the clisp hackers, but who needs xref anyway? 
> 
> This would be a bit of a pity just because it's a nice module.

I know, but there is also the small matter of the licence 'infecting' 
the remainder of slime.

> > - doc/Makefile HACKING NEWS PROBLEMS README ChangeLog
> >  someone just has to declare then PD?
> 
> Can we make this declaration in e.g. the README or a COPYING file?

Correct.

> How is this normally done? I don't remember seeing license
> declarations inside ChangeLog or NEWS files.

In general there is a licence that covers the whole thing, with possible
exceptions. Slime has _no_ general licence, but only exceptions.

This forces you to declare the licence of all parts. It is a big pain in the 
***.

Then there is the dubious nature of ChangeLog which is of mixed licence?

Groetjes, Peter