On 06/02/15 03:30, Eriberto wrote:
IMHO you can use GPL-2, considering 1999-2002 (or nearly) as upstream date.
Also, if no version of the GPL is specified, you are free to choose any
version. From section 9 of the GPL-2:
If the Program does not specify a version number of this License, you
may
On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 8:23 PM, Denis Briand wrote:
I intend to adopt 'e2ps' package who was orphaned (see #773952)
In the upstream source tarball there isn't any copyright files and license
headers in sources files.
This package is on debian main repositories since 1999.
For me its a
IMHO you can use GPL-2, considering 1999-2002 (or nearly) as upstream date.
Regards,
Eriberto
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
Hello,
I intend to adopt 'e2ps' package who was orphaned (see #773952)
In the upstream source tarball there isn't any copyright files and license
headers in sources files.
This package is on debian main repositories since 1999.
For me its a DFSG-incompatible software.
Is it in public domain?
On 06/02/15 01:26, Paul Wise wrote:
The other README files also mention the GPL but I can't read Japanese:
I can read Japanese, and it doesn't specify a version.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact
5 matches
Mail list logo
