On Thu, 21 Feb 2008, Willi Mann wrote:
Can you explain to me what the consequences of an imcomplete list of
copyright holders would be? It should make it easier for me to argue
upstream.
The most important one is that not having all of the copyright holders
represented means that we don't
Don Armstrong wrote:
On Thu, 21 Feb 2008, Willi Mann wrote:
Can you explain to me what the consequences of an imcomplete list of
copyright holders would be? It should make it easier for me to argue
upstream.
The most important one is that not having all of the copyright holders
represented
Am Do 21 Feb 2008 10:25:01 CET
schrieb Giacomo A. Catenazzi [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
IMHO the patches sent to a upstream author which
doesn't patch the original copyright (adding a name or
a copyright line) should be interpreted as the above case.
IMHO the author implicit acknowledges that the
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 10:00 AM, Michael Below [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am Do 21 Feb 2008 10:25:01 CET
schrieb Giacomo A. Catenazzi [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
IMHO the patches sent to a upstream author which
doesn't patch the original copyright (adding a name or
a copyright line) should be
The most important one is that not having all of the copyright holders
represented means that we don't actually know what terms we are able
to distribute the final work. A component of a work which is
unlicenced makes the entire work undistributable.
I don't understand why this is solved by
Please preserve attribution lines for material that you quote, so we
can see who wrote what at each level.
Willi Mann [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The default suggestion would be for you (or people you can trust
to do the work) to contact those further upstream who could tell
you about the
NB: If you can keep attribution intact in the future, that would help
a lot.
On Thu, 21 Feb 2008, Willi Mann wrote:
The most important one is that not having all of the copyright
holders represented means that we don't actually know what terms
we are able to distribute the final work. A
John Halton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 10:00 AM, Michael Below [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am Do 21 Feb 2008 10:25:01 CET
schrieb Giacomo A. Catenazzi [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
IMHO the patches sent to a upstream author which
doesn't patch
Hi!
The package logwatch [1] I maintain contains no sane list of copyright
holders.
The file License in the upstream package contains the line
Copyright (c) 2007 Kirk Bauer
but this is obviously incomplete because the upstream package contains
some code that I am copyright holder of. And there
Willi Mann [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
For the next upload, I'd like to get this right. Can anybody tell me
what I should do to get this right, at least to meet our standards
for copyright files? What should I suggest to upstream to fix the
License file? Just saying: Add all copyright holders
The default suggestion would be for you (or people you can trust to do
the work) to contact those further upstream who could tell you about
the copyright status of each part of the work; repeat until done,
continue in perpetuity.
Can you explain to me what the consequences of an imcomplete
11 matches
Mail list logo
