On Mon, Apr 26, 1999 at 02:09:55PM -0400, Fabien Ninoles wrote:
2. You must redistribute the ENTIRE kdrill package
(determined by the distribution from ftp.bolthole.com),
if you choose to redistribute it, including all copyright, documentation,
source code, and any other types of
Fabien Ninoles writes:
I know that's don't make it able to go in main, but I would like
to know what you think about the implications of such license.
And quotes:
1. section 3c of the Artistic license, reguarding renaming executables
for distribution, is not a valid option, for section
James M . Mastros writes:
Is it just me, or would this make (normal -- IE compiled binary)
packaging impossible?
I think you're right. So it's non-free after all.
Maybe this?
2. You must redistribute the ENTIRE kdrill package (determined by the
distribution from ftp.bolthole.com), if
Is SGI's OpenVault license
(http://www.sgi.com/software/opensource/openvault/license.html)
DFSG / Open Source?
They claim its open source (see press release at
http://www.newsalert.com/bin/story?StoryId=CnYpKWbWbu0znmduZFQ=open-source)
jeff smith
On Tue, Apr 27, 1999 at 08:54:57AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is SGI's OpenVault license
(http://www.sgi.com/software/opensource/openvault/license.html)
DFSG / Open Source?
They claim its open source (see press release at
Brian Ristuccia writes:
* Notification Clause (3)
* Advertising Clause (5)
* US Legislation Imperialism (7)
Yes.
Interesting:
* Patent Infringement Clause (8)
Recipient must place in a well-identified web page bearing the title
LEGAL, which is readily accessible to the public during
Brian Ristuccia writes:
Problems:
[...]
* US Legislation Imperialism (7)
That paragraph is a lot worse than the Export Law Assurances paragraph in
the original APSL.
7. Compliance with Laws; Non-Infringement. Recipient shall comply with
all applicable laws and regulations in
8 matches
Mail list logo
