Subject: Re: Sacla: Yet Another (partial) Common Lisp implementation (was Re: Yet Another CLOS implementation)
From: (Rob Warnock)
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 21:59:00 -0500
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Message-ID: <>
<> wrote:
| Pascal Costanza <> wrote:
| > See for an alternative approach to 
| > licensing. (See "Choose License".)
| For potential problems with Creative Commons licences see:

I agree. My suggestion is to use the "new" BSD license (or the
MIT/X license) if you feel you can, or the LLGPL ("Lisp LGPL")
license <> if you must.
Failing that, the LGPL or the GPL. Regardless of what anyone feels
about the desirability of using one of those, at least they are
very well known, and their implications are widely thought to be
understood. Anything else is just going create more confusion and
problems with interoperability and/or community contributions, IMHO.


Rob Warnock			<>
627 26th Avenue			<URL:>
San Mateo, CA 94403		(650)572-2607