Re: guile-user Digest, Vol 204, Issue 2

John Cowan wrote: > Dual licensing is also a possibility, so that users who prefer the GPLv3 > license would still have it. Dual licensing with a lax license option would eliminate the main advantage of copyleft, namely that it offers an inducement to those who wish to use Guile-JSON to release t

Re: guile-user Digest, Vol 204, Issue 2

Hi John, John Cowan writes: > Distinguo. I have not *pressured* the author to dual license; that is, I > have not exercised force or undue influence (of which I have none). According to , "pressure" means: "To encourage or heavily exert force or in

Re: guile-user Digest, Vol 204, Issue 2

The specific wording can be found at point 9 of < https://srfi.schemers.org/srfi-process.html>. On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 2:34 PM Mark H Weaver wrote: > Hi Aleix, > > Aleix Conchillo Flaqué wrote: > > If at some point I decide to switch to the MIT license I assume > > the projects that currently u

Re: guile-user Digest, Vol 204, Issue 2

Hi Aleix, Aleix Conchillo Flaqué wrote: > If at some point I decide to switch to the MIT license I assume > the projects that currently use guile-json would still be able to use it > (probably renamed to some SRFI number) the same way they use other SRFIs, > right? Yes, as long as it's GPL-compa

Re: guile-user Digest, Vol 204, Issue 2

On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 1:52 PM Aleix Conchillo Flaqué wrote: If at some point I decide to switch to the MIT license > Dual licensing is also a possibility, so that users who prefer the GPLv3 license would still have it. > I assume the projects that currently use guile-json would still be able

Re: guile-user Digest, Vol 204, Issue 2

Distinguo. I have not *pressured* the author to dual license; that is, I have not exercised force or undue influence (of which I have none). I have *asked* them to do so and presented arguments in favor of it. A fortiori, I am not asking them to bow to me, but to act if they agree with my reaso

Re: guile-user Digest, Vol 204, Issue 2

On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 10:19 AM Mark H Weaver wrote: > I wrote: > > Zelphir could propose a SRFI for the API only, with no reference > > implementation. The existing implementation could remain copylefted. > > John Cowan replied: > > Unfortunately not. A SRFI must have a sample implementation

Re: guile-user Digest, Vol 204, Issue 2

I wrote: > Zelphir could propose a SRFI for the API only, with no reference > implementation. The existing implementation could remain copylefted. John Cowan replied: > Unfortunately not. A SRFI must have a sample implementation to get > finalized (otherwise it is feared there would be too many

Re: guile-user Digest, Vol 204, Issue 2

Unfortunately not. A SRFI must have a sample implementation to get finalized (otherwise it is feared there would be too many WIBNI SRFIs). The implementation doesn't have to be portable, but it has to have the correct license. On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 11:43 AM Mark H Weaver wrote: > John Cowan w

Re: guile-user Digest, Vol 204, Issue 2

John Cowan writes: > +1. If only it weren't GPL3, which makes it ineligible to be a SRFI > implementation Zelphir could propose a SRFI for the API only, with no reference implementation. The existing implementation could remain copylefted. Mark

Re: guile-user Digest, Vol 204, Issue 2

Thank you Aleix, that one worked On Wed, Nov 6, 2019 at 12:13 AM Aleix Conchillo Flaqué wrote: > Weird. Savannah has a set of mirrors, may be the one you hit is no longer > valid. Try this one: > http://nongnu.askapache.com/guile-json/guile-json-3.3.0.tar.gz > > On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 10:12 PM G

Re: guile-user Digest, Vol 204, Issue 2

is done before >>> printing any JSON). Also, an additional key argument #:validate can be >>> given to ignore the validation in the case performance is important and >> the >>> data is known to be valid. Empty JSON array slots are also considered >>> invalid, before they were generating an invalid scheme representation. A >>> few more details can be found on the NEWS file. >>> >>> https://github.com/aconchillo/guile-json >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Aleix >>> >> >> -- >> >> Subject: Digest Footer >> >> ___ >> guile-user mailing list >> guile-user@gnu.org >> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user >> >> >> -- >> >> End of guile-user Digest, Vol 204, Issue 2 >> ** >> >

Re: guile-user Digest, Vol 204, Issue 2

tails can be found on the NEWS file. > > > > https://github.com/aconchillo/guile-json > > > > Best, > > > > Aleix > > > > > -- > > Subject: Digest Footer > > ___ > guile-user mailing list > guile-user@gnu.org > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user > > > -- > > End of guile-user Digest, Vol 204, Issue 2 > ** > -- Sent from my Palm Pilot

Re: guile-user Digest, Vol 204, Issue 2

+1. If only it weren't GPL3, which makes it ineligible to be a SRFI implementation Is there any chance of dual-licensing it under MIT? On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 7:03 PM Zelphir Kaltstahl wrote: > This is great! A solid JSON parsing and outputting library is important > for a programming langu

Re: guile-user Digest, Vol 204, Issue 2

This is great! A solid JSON parsing and outputting library is important for a programming language these days! Thanks for your work! On 11/5/19 6:00 PM, guile-user-requ...@gnu.org wrote: > Message: 1 > Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2019 22:28:12 -0800 > From: Aleix Conchillo Flaqué > To: guile-user > Subject