Re: dvbackup package

Herbert Fortes (2016-07-05): > I am doing a QA for dvbackup[0]. It is an old package, > but does not has a repository, so I will copy/paste. > > [0] - https://packages.qa.debian.org/d/dvbackup.html > > Files: logo.xcf >    minilogo.ppm >    minilogo.c > Copyright: Larry

Re: PHP licence SFLC questions draft v4

Ian Jackson ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk (2014-08-21): Draft question for SFLC: (there are no changes since v3 apart from fixes to the numbering of some section cross-references) Some members of the Debian project have some concerns about the PHP licence. These worries are dismissed

Re: Ask about dmaths/openoffice.org-dmaths package license.

Paul Wise p...@debian.org (10/01/2011): The Google translation indicates Excerpts from the international standard ISO 31-11: 1992 I doubt either of these are distributable. Apparently, usual rules apply: http://www.iso.org/iso/support/copyright.htm KiBi. signature.asc Description:

Re: Joke non-free clauses?

Francesco Poli f...@firenze.linux.it (24/02/2010): Or maybe they are jokes that look like non-free clauses, I am not sure which one makes more sense or better describes the situation... Looks like upstream clarified the “joke status”?

Re: Bug#565884: Please include CeCILL* licenses in common-licenses

MJ Ray m...@phonecoop.coop (20/01/2010): Roughly how many packages/files are under the licence? I reached a massive count of 42 binary packages this way: | k...@bellini:/org/lintian.debian.org/laboratory/binary | $ grep -l -i cecill */copyright | wc -l (I know about ../source, but not all

Re: License requiring to reproduce copyrights in binary distributions.

Charles Plessy ple...@debian.org (02/07/2009): […] may I suggest the BOLA license, that is a politically correct version of the WTFPL? http://blitiri.com.ar/p/bola/ Quoting it: | The BOLA text | Here's the text. I usually place it in a file named LICENSE in the top directory of the project.

Re: xf86-video-glamo license check

Francesco Poli f...@firenze.linux.it (15/05/2009): Please cc:me, I am not subscribed to d-legal, TIA. Done. Ditto. From src/glamo-driver.c: Authors: Alan Hourihane, al...@fairlite.demon.co.uk Michel Dänzer, mic...@tungstengraphics.com

Re: Public Domain for Germans

Joerg Jaspert [EMAIL PROTECTED] (05/11/2008): You can't make something PD in Germany, that just doesn't work with our laws. You should also NOT create new licenses / new words for things, that makes it just unneccessarily complex, for example if people want to bundle stuff together. Even if

Re: Misuse of Debian logo for City Tourism

Tim Heckman [EMAIL PROTECTED] (25/07/2008): I've been a long time user of Debian GNU/Linux, and I can recognize that logo anywhere. Well, I was watching a local news station, and noticed this commerical using the Debian GNU/Linux logo.

Copy vs. (re)distribute

Hi, since I've got upstreams (having copied some code from others, that's why they aren't spelling it out directly) that aren't convinced that having the rights to copy, use, modify is insufficient to meet the DFSG. From what I recall having read during NM, I've never seen any discussion

Re: Desert island test

to the letter the proposed templates. Cheers, -- Cyril Brulebois pgp6X6ACY0Ftb.pgp Description: PGP signature

How to dual-license? (Was: Review of CeCILL-C?)

On 22/01/2008, Cyril Brulebois wrote: Many thanks for your review, it confirms my initial doubts. It's been forwarded upstream and dual-licensing is underway. Some background: upstream A uses upstream B's code. B accepted the idea of dual-licensing, but nothing happened yet, and A is being

Re: Review of CeCILL-C? (This is not “plain” CeCILL.)

not seem to be GPL compatible, although it is very clear that the GPL v2 was studied in the preperation of this licence. Many thanks for your review, it confirms my initial doubts. It's been forwarded upstream and dual-licensing is underway. Cheers, -- Cyril Brulebois pgpJOxrgBReeY.pgp

Review of CeCILL-C? (This is not “plain” CeCILL.)

(s/html/txt/ in URL). 1. http://cecill.info/licences/Licence_CeCILL-B_V1-en.html 2. http://cecill.info/licences/Licence_CeCILL-C_V1-en.html 3. http://cecill.info/licences.fr.html I'd be glad if those licenses (in particular CeCILL-C) could be reviewed. Thanks in advance. Cheers, -- Cyril