my opinion on secrecy of D license

[Mike Parker]

arnuld wrote:
> i just started to learn c++, then i heard about "D". it looked good. i searched
> your web-site for information, i thought i should start learning it but you are
> secretive about exact information of your licence. i tried to search your
> web-site for license of D but concluded that you do not want to tell openly how
> exactly you licensed D. If you want to keep D under a ``Proprietary license'',
> then just go ahead and do it. what do you fear?. if you want to keep D
> open-source, then go ahead and do it.
> 
> -----------------------
> you have made things confusing like this:
> 
> Q. Will D be open source?
> 
> A: The front end for D is open source, and the source comes with the compiler.
> There is a  SourceForge project underway to create a Gnu implementation of D
> from this.
> 
>> it is like :
>> Q: what's your name?
>> A: yeah, i am hungry.
> 
> 
> Q: Which parts of the Digital Mars D implementation are Free software? [Apr 04]
> 
> The DMD front-end source is available under dual ( GPL and Artistic) license.
> Phobos, the D standard library, is now licensed under a zlib/libpng license
> unless the individual file specifies otherwise. The DMD compiler, back-end and
> libraries are licensed non-distributable under a DigitalMars license. The D
> language specification and accompanying documents are similarly copyrighted to
> DigitalMars. -- JustinCalvarese, additions by AndersFBjörklund 
> 
>> this time Q has put limit on the answer.
> 
> 
> The D language comes free. You can download the compiler (DMD) and standard
> library (Phobos) in a package that includes the Windows and the Linux (x86)
> system.
> 
>> even Microsoft distributes its Media layer free & that is not FLOSS.
> 
> ----
> 
> i am not asking you to make D OpenSource, i am asking you to be clear. Keeping
> users of D confused will not make things better and only making things
> technically better does not guarntee any success. see WINDOWS, the much buggier
> OS, if not most, *but* it is a success. the richest person on this planet made
> his fortune not by selling airplanes, rails or petroleum but by selling  most
> buggy OS. *technical* matter (at OS level) doensn'n play here. what do you
> think?
> 
> it is just a logical explanation. be clear on D, please.
> 
> just a user.
> 
> thanks for your precious time.

There's nothing secretive about it. Everything you need to know is 
answered right there in the second question you quoted. If that's not 
clear enough for you, I don't know what is. The front-end is open source 
under dual GPL and Artistic licenses, Phobos is licenses under a 
zlib/libpng license, while the compiler and the rest of the back-end are 
proprietary. What's the problem?