www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - Licence

reply Georg Wrede <georg.wrede nospam.org> writes:
So that (1) we wouldn't have to explain licencing details once a week to 
somebody new, and (2) hordes of people wouldn't turn away thinking "aw, 
this licensing stuff seems [expletive]", I suggest that Walter put a 
statement right on the D main page.

Something like what's below, should be framed in a big pink box:

-------------------------------------------------------------------



         About Licences
         ==============

== The *D programming language* ==

  - is free for anyone to use for both open source and commercial 
applications.

  - anyone can write a D compiler, and either sell it or give it away, 
and it can be either open or closed source, without needing a permission 
from Digital Mars.

  - anyone either programming in the D programming language, or writing 
tools for it, acknowledges that Digital Mars is the sole authority on 
the specifications of the D programming language. These are, and will 
always be available for free from the Digital Mars web site.

== The Digital Mars D *compiler* (DMD) ==

  - DMD is free (as in beer) for anyone to use, and may be used in both 
open and closed source projects. And it will *stay* that way.

  - DMD itself may not be sold, without a prior written licence 
agreement with Digital Mars. It may, however be freely copied to 
friends. (We do recommend always directly *downloading* the latest 
version straight from the www.digitalmars.com/d page.)

== Important detail about DMD ==

The Digital Mars D compiler (DMD) download consists of four parts, which 
has licencing implications for *other developers of D compilers*:

  (1) The Compiler Back End.
  (2) The Compiler Front End.
  (3) The included libraries.
  (4) All other files included in the download.

Digital Mars uses the same proprietary Compiler Back End ((1), above) in 
the DMD compiler as in their other products. This back end is closed 
source, and proprietary. (It is possibly the fastest and most efficient 
back end on the market.)

If you want to use this Back End in your implementation of a D compiler, 
please contact sales digitalmars.com, for licensing terms. (We are also 
available as expert consultants for any party developing their own D 
compiler.)

*All the other parts* (i.e. (2), (3), and (4), above), are free for 
anyone to copy, use, modify, and include in a free or commercial 
compiler, and for other purposes.

== Legal Disclaimer ==

  - we reserve the right to change this statement at any time. (But rest 
assured, we do hope we don't have to.)

  - the text in this box should be considered an expression of our 
intent and philosophy, and does *not represent* any legal commitments.

  - for the exact details, and the actual licences, please refer to 
"readme" files supplied with the DMD compiler, or [this link].

-------------------------------------------------------------------

This got pretty long, so maybe a _prominent_ link to this, from the top 
of the D page would be more appropriate?

I've of course been "creative" with some details, and don't assume this 
doesn't need a lot of changes. :-) But it's a good draft, I hope.

I really think having this well visible would save us all time and 
bandwidth, and remove a slow-down from D's spread.

Microsoft appreciates the enormous impact of FUD. Well, not having the 
above visible and clear, actually creates FUD. Which we simply can't afford!
May 02 2006
next sibling parent Walter Bright <newshound digitalmars.com> writes:
Georg Wrede wrote:
 
 So that (1) we wouldn't have to explain licencing details once a week to 
 somebody new, and (2) hordes of people wouldn't turn away thinking "aw, 
 this licensing stuff seems [expletive]", I suggest that Walter put a 
 statement right on the D main page.

I think it's a good idea, and this needs to be done. It's also a good draft of what it should be.
May 02 2006
prev sibling next sibling parent Brad Roberts <braddr puremagic.com> writes:
On Tue, 2 May 2006, Georg Wrede wrote:

 So that (1) we wouldn't have to explain licencing details once a week to
 somebody new, and (2) hordes of people wouldn't turn away thinking "aw, this
 licensing stuff seems [expletive]", I suggest that Walter put a statement
 right on the D main page.
 
 Something like what's below, should be framed in a big pink box:
 
 -------------------------------------------------------------------
 
         About Licences
         ==============
 
 == The *D programming language* ==
 
 == The Digital Mars D *compiler* (DMD) ==
 
 == Important detail about DMD ==
 
 The Digital Mars D compiler (DMD) download consists of four parts, which has
 licencing implications for *other developers of D compilers*:
 
  (1) The Compiler Back End.
  (2) The Compiler Front End.
  (3) The included libraries.
  (4) All other files included in the download.
 
 Digital Mars uses the same proprietary Compiler Back End ((1), above) in the
 DMD compiler as in their other products. This back end is closed source, and
 proprietary. (It is possibly the fastest and most efficient back end on the
 market.)
 
 If you want to use this Back End in your implementation of a D compiler,
 please contact sales digitalmars.com, for licensing terms. (We are also
 available as expert consultants for any party developing their own D
 compiler.)
 
 *All the other parts* (i.e. (2), (3), and (4), above), are free for anyone to
 copy, use, modify, and include in a free or commercial compiler, and for other
 purposes.

The separateness of the compiler from the runtime library and their license differences should be called out more prominently. Probably by the libraries having their own top level header and then mentioning that dmd and phobos are bundled together for the purposes of distribution. Later, Brad
May 02 2006
prev sibling parent reply Don Clugston <dac nospam.com.au> writes:
Georg Wrede wrote:
 The Digital Mars D compiler (DMD) download consists of four parts, which 
 has licencing implications for *other developers of D compilers*:
 
  (1) The Compiler Back End.
  (2) The Compiler Front End.
  (3) The included libraries.
  (4) All other files included in the download.
 
 Digital Mars uses the same proprietary Compiler Back End ((1), above) in 
 the DMD compiler as in their other products. This back end is closed 
 source, and proprietary. (It is possibly the fastest and most efficient 
 back end on the market.)
 
 If you want to use this Back End in your implementation of a D compiler, 
 please contact sales digitalmars.com, for licensing terms. (We are also 
 available as expert consultants for any party developing their own D 
 compiler.)
 
 *All the other parts* (i.e. (2), (3), and (4), above), are free for 
 anyone to copy, use, modify, and include in a free or commercial 
 compiler, and for other purposes.

I thought the compiler front end was only free for use for open-source compilers?
May 02 2006
parent Georg Wrede <georg.wrede nospam.org> writes:
Don Clugston wrote:
 Georg Wrede wrote:
 
 The Digital Mars D compiler (DMD) download consists of four parts, 
 which has licencing implications for *other developers of D compilers*:

  (1) The Compiler Back End.
  (2) The Compiler Front End.
  (3) The included libraries.
  (4) All other files included in the download.

 Digital Mars uses the same proprietary Compiler Back End ((1), above) 
 in the DMD compiler as in their other products. This back end is 
 closed source, and proprietary. (It is possibly the fastest and most 
 efficient back end on the market.)

 If you want to use this Back End in your implementation of a D 
 compiler, please contact sales digitalmars.com, for licensing terms. 
 (We are also available as expert consultants for any party developing 
 their own D compiler.)

 *All the other parts* (i.e. (2), (3), and (4), above), are free for 
 anyone to copy, use, modify, and include in a free or commercial 
 compiler, and for other purposes.

I thought the compiler front end was only free for use for open-source compilers?

I've no idea. After all, this was just a draft proposal, so the "sorta, kinda, overall of it" was the point. :-) Then again, if I don't have an idea, then this has brought up that too. But thinking about what's best for D itself, maybe the FE _should_ be free for non-open-source too.
May 03 2006