[Gcl-devel] Re:GCLgetting slushy ...

[C Y]

--- Camm Maguire <address@hidden> wrote:

> We should probably instead default to
> 
> GCL (GNU Common Lisp)  (2.6.1) Fri Feb 20 16:31:57 UTC 2004
> GCL source licensed under GNU Library General Public License
> This binary licensed under the GPL due to the inclusion of
> the following external GPL'ed features: unexec, libbfd, readline
> Modifications of this banner must retain notice of a compatible
> license
> Dedicated to the memory of W. Schelter

I can see why you want to do this Camm, but it makes for a rather long
banner.  I'm guessing that users for the most part won't be interested
in the details of the licensing - they'll just want to use it.  Perhaps
the full message could be run at first startup, and then something more
minimal used instead?  I can understand if you don't think that's a
good option, but I thought I'd mention it.

> This list could be generated from elements in the *features* list put
> in at compile time depending on the selected options.  
> 
> Thoughts, (but not flames :-)) most appreciated.

I guess my thinking comes from a "display minimum data to completely
describe the program" mentality, since people aren't likely to read the
message more than once anyway.  GCL and version number, and maybe
information about what platform it is being run on (Debian 2.0 x86) or
something) to me would be the data relevant to every run if the
question is reproducability of a result or debugging info.  If the
banner has to have a license notice (which again I don't think the
normal user is likely to care about beyond the initial install and
setup) then a "licensed under GPL" tag should take care of it.  If they
care about it beyond that they'll read the initial longer startup
message the first time.

My thoughts, for what they may be worth :-).

CY

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want.
http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools