On 13/03/10 08:18, Paul Wise wrote:
Is there the perception that the MPL is still nessecary? I'm wondering
what features of the current/future MPL are desired and are not
satisfied by the LGPL / GPL dual licensing combination or could be
The scope of the copyleft in the MPL (file-level) is
On 13/03/10 21:52, Francesco Poli wrote:
However, the license text to be commented is *not* identical to the
official text of the MPL version 1.1 [2].
[1] http://mpl.mozilla.org/participate/comment/
[2] http://www.mozilla.org/MPL/MPL-1.1.txt (as far as I know)
The differences (as shown by
On 15/03/10 10:52, Gervase Markham wrote:
I will enquire as to what happened, and hopefully get the
draft-for-comment corrected.
https://mpl.co-ment.com/text/NMccndsidpP/view/?comment_id_key=JeG3XyUGGI7
Gerv
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of
On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 10:52:11 + Gervase Markham wrote:
On 13/03/10 21:52, Francesco Poli wrote:
However, the license text to be commented is *not* identical to the
official text of the MPL version 1.1 [2].
[1] http://mpl.mozilla.org/participate/comment/
[2]
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 12:43 AM, Gervase Markham gerv-gm...@gerv.net wrote:
Earlier today Mozilla announced that we're launching a community process
to update, simplify, and modernize the MPL. You can find more
information about the process at http://mpl.mozilla.org/
Is there the perception
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 00:46:53 +0100 Francesco Poli wrote:
On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 17:43:15 + Gervase Markham wrote:
Hi, debian-legal :-)
Earlier today Mozilla announced that we're launching a community process
to update, simplify, and modernize the MPL. You can find more
information
On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 17:43:15 + Gervase Markham wrote:
Hi, debian-legal :-)
Earlier today Mozilla announced that we're launching a community process
to update, simplify, and modernize the MPL. You can find more
information about the process at http://mpl.mozilla.org/
[...]
Thanks for
7 matches
Mail list logo
