[plt-scheme] using units (was enclosing-module-name)

From: support at taxupdate.com (support at taxupdate.com)
Date: Thu Apr 5 11:40:44 EDT 2007

On Thu, Apr 05, 2007 at 03:39:54PM -0400, Carl Eastlund wrote:

> >So in an embedded environment, I'm guessing this means distributing the
> >unit.ss file + its dependencies along with my app, right?  Would this have
> >any effect as far as licensing?  I plan to use dual licensing (GPLv2 plus
> >commercial).
> You're already using PLT Scheme.  The unit.ss library is part of the
> standard PLT Scheme library.  I wouldn't expect including it to
> introduce any licensing issues you haven't already run into.  Does
> that sound right, or am I misunderstanding the issue?

Yes, you are understanding the issue here.  I have two concerns:

1) the introduction of more files in the distribution of my application,
   which currently only requires libmzscheme and libgc, and
2) any licensing complications associated with these additional files.

I'll avoid adding files to the distribution if at all possible.  Just glancing
at the require-for-syntax form in unit.ss gives me the impression that there will
be quite a few files involved. However, this is an important design issue
(the use of units), so it may be worth the added payload.

I've understood from previous discussions that use of the libmzscheme
and libgc libraries is compatible with commercial applications.  I've never
seen any discussion that addresses the issue of distributing the files from
the plt collections directories, and there's no copyright header on unit.ss.
Can anyone confirm that distribution of these files falls under the LGPL?


Posted on the users mailing list.