On 2016-02-12 09:47:44 -0500, Leif Andersen wrote: > > If the intention wasn't to force programs written in racket to be open > > source, then why wasn't an explicit exemption of the runtime libraries > > made, like other projects have? (As stated, like it was done for e.g. GCC > > and Java.) > > This is probably because none of us are lawyers. And are thus hesitant > to write legal documents.
Also making these kind of "crayon licenses" is generally a bad idea: http://opensource.stackexchange.com/questions/1445/how-can-a-crayon-license-be-a-problem Cheers, Asumu -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
