Any chance to call Tango as Extended Standard Library

[Lars Ivar Igesund]

Steven Schveighoffer wrote:

> "Piotrek" wrote
>> Hello!
>>
>> It's just an idea. After reading about issues on disallowing DWT to stay
>> in standardization area (Anomaly on Wiki4D GuiLibraries page) some
>> question appeared in my mind. For propaganda sake isn't it better to not
>> make such a big division between phobos and tango in the module naming?
>> Logically:
>>
>> phobos -> std
>> tango  -> stdex (not tango -> tango)
> 
> Let's not forget the licensing issues.  Tango is incompatible with some
> developers license wise, as you must include attribution for Tango in any
> derivative works (i.e. compiled binaries).  Phobos has a less restrictive
> opt-in policy.  I think Walter intends to keep it that way, at least for
> DMD.  Note that other compilers are free to use Tango or their own
> standard library, the D spec is pretty free from library references.

Sorry, where do you find this attribution clause? The only two restrictions put on Tango source is:

 * You cannot relicense the source - can't possibly be a problem to anyone
 * You cannot take the source and say you wrote it (unless you actually did) - not a problem for a single person unless he'd like to be dishonest.

Saying that Tango is license-encumbered in any way is a gross misunderstanding.

-- 
Lars Ivar Igesund
blog at http://larsivi.net
DSource, #d.tango & #D: larsivi
Dancing the Tango