Re^7: Perl 5 Optimizing Compiler, Part 10: Kickstarter & Performance Benchmarks

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^8: Perl 5 Optimizing Compiler, Part 10: Kickstarter & Performance Benchmarks by Will_the_Chill (Pilgrim) on Dec 03, 2013 at 06:19 UTC
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	[reply]
Re^9: Perl 5 Optimizing Compiler, Part 10: Kickstarter & Performance Benchmarks by Anonymous Monk on Dec 03, 2013 at 09:47 UTC
Ahhh, the Artistic license, yeah, you can distribute binaries without source if you change-names-docs-trademarks... and document where to get the original source http://opensource.org/licenses/artistic-license-1.0 3.c You may modify ... provided ... rename ... manual ... differences from original 4.c You may distribute ... provided ... non-standard names ... document where get original http://opensource.org/licenses/artistic-license-2.0 Distribution of Compiled Forms of the Standard Version or Modified Versions without the Source (5) You may Distribute ... provided document where get original (6) You may Distribute ... provided give source to original owner / buyers on demand Distribute means buy/sell/whatever Naturally I'm not a lawyer and I don't pretend to be lawyer and this isn't legal advice and my sit-upon is itchy :)	[reply]
Re^9: Perl 5 Optimizing Compiler, Part 10: Kickstarter & Performance Benchmarks by ysth (Canon) on Dec 03, 2013 at 19:59 UTC
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artistic_License; the original version is not an FSF-recognized free software license, there are some ambiguities which are corrected in the Clarified Artistic License and the Artistic License 2.0. -- A math joke: r = \| \|csc(θ)\|+\|sec(θ)\| \|-\| \|csc(θ)\|-\|sec(θ)\| \|	[reply]
Re^10: Perl 5 Optimizing Compiler, Part 10: Kickstarter & Performance Benchmarks by Will_the_Chill (Pilgrim) on Dec 04, 2013 at 07:49 UTC
ysth, I'm want to make RPerl available under the same terms as Perl itself so that RPerl and Perl source code can be mixed without worrying about what license applies to what. Does that make sense? Also, I want to write a 1 or 2 sentence explanation of how the RPerl license affects end-users, as I have already attempted to do in the RPerl FAQ. Can you please give me guidance on what you think would be accurate wording? Thanks! Perling, ~ Will	[reply]
Re^10: Perl 5 Optimizing Compiler, Part 10: Kickstarter & Performance Benchmarks by Will_the_Chill (Pilgrim) on Dec 04, 2013 at 07:52 UTC
Also, it seems like there is some disagreement about whether a "Perl" project (like RPerl) should be licensed under Artistic v1 or Artistic v2. Can you give me input on that please?	[reply]
Re^11: Perl 5 Optimizing Compiler, Part 10: Kickstarter & Performance Benchmarks by ysth (Canon) on Dec 05, 2013 at 07:20 UTC
Re^12: Perl 5 Optimizing Compiler, Part 10: Kickstarter & Performance Benchmarks by Will_the_Chill (Pilgrim) on Dec 10, 2013 at 07:51 UTC


Perl Monk, Perl Meditation
	PerlMonks