http://qs321.pair.com?node_id=1065198


in reply to Re^4: Perl 5 Optimizing Compiler, Part 10: Kickstarter & Performance Benchmarks
in thread Perl 5 Optimizing Compiler, Part 10: Kickstarter & Performance Benchmarks

That is not what I would consider a reasonable summary of the options available under the Artistic license, which is basically aimed at not letting someone else distribute something (commercially or not) as "RPerl" that in fact has proprietary modifications.
--
A math joke: r = | |csc(θ)|+|sec(θ)| |-| |csc(θ)|-|sec(θ)| |

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^6: Perl 5 Optimizing Compiler, Part 10: Kickstarter & Performance Benchmarks
by Will_the_Chill (Pilgrim) on Dec 02, 2013 at 04:02 UTC
    ysth, can you please provide your suggested wording so I can see what you mean, exactly?

      Abbreviating a license is very error prone. I would recommend you say less rather than more. What you do say makes me think you are only thinking of the GPL, not the Artistic license. You can modify and distribute RPerl without providing source code for your modifications, for instance, so long as you adhere to paragraphs 3c and 4c. You can even sell it, if aggregated as specified in paragraph 5.

      --
      A math joke: r = | |csc(θ)|+|sec(θ)| |-| |csc(θ)|-|sec(θ)| |
        ysth,

        From the RPerl FAQ:

        "This means ... you can't re-sell RPerl without the source code ..."

        I re-read the Artistic license to make sure I understood your point. Is it truly inaccurate for me to say that "you can't re-sell RPerl without the source code"?

        Yes I've read and re-read Artistic sections 3c, 4c, and 5. I'm honestly not sure.

        Thanks!

        Perling,
        ~ Will
Re^6: Perl 5 Optimizing Compiler, Part 10: Kickstarter & Performance Benchmarks
by Anonymous Monk on Dec 02, 2013 at 01:41 UTC

    That is not what I would consider a reasonable summary of the options available under the Artistic license,....

    ysth, come on now , sure it is