my opinion on secrecy of D license

[BCS]

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:
[...]

To arnuld:

If I understand correctly (both your question and about how D is 
distributed):

	DMD, the compiler, is free to download and use but your not supposed to 
redistribute it.

	Phobos, the standard lib, is mostly open source. You can (I'm almost 
positive) use it in any project, change it, recompile it, redistribute 
it or print it out and use it to decorate you room. Provided you don't 
lie about where it came from or what it is.

	The D spec. (the actual text) is copywriter. However using it to make a 
new D compiler is more than OK. In fact, I expect we'd all be really 
happy if you did that.


To the rest of us:
	If this guy (who appears top have done a more than cursory examination 
of the docs) has trouble figuring these things out. Maybe we need to 
take another look at it.

(Drifting off on a tangent)
	Maybe we need someone to manage the not so technical aspects of the 
website. Besides, that might free Walter up for more work on DMD. 
Putting up a CVS/SVC/etc. copy of the website would let us all 
contribute. Then Walter could merge in the stuff he likes.