Re: Status of uw-prism packaging for Debian

Hi Ira, On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 01:42:51PM -0700, Ira Kalet wrote: I had the good fortune at a recent social event to meet an attorney for one of the big multinational corporations in the medical device business, whose job is to look after FDA regulatory issues. He even was familiar with

PHP License SFLC questions

Sorry to write to the list again, but can anyone confirm that the questions to the SFLC about the PHP license have actually been sent? It's been about two weeks since the letter was written. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe.

Re: Status of uw-prism packaging for Debian

Hi Andreas, Answers to your extremely important questions below. On 08/18/2014 11:38 PM, Andreas Tille wrote: Hi Ira, On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 01:42:51PM -0700, Ira Kalet wrote: I had the good fortune at a recent social event to meet an attorney for one of the big multinational corporations

Upstream GPL-3+ vs debian/* GPL-2+

Hi, I have a doubt about a situation. The upstream source code is GPL3+. Packaging is a derivative work and I think that it must be GPL. So, GPL-3+, right? Or can the debian/* be GPL-2+? From FSF site[1]: - Is GPLv3 compatible with GPLv2? No. Some of the requirements in GPLv3,

Re: Upstream GPL-3+ vs debian/* GPL-2+

Le Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 11:15:46AM -0300, Eriberto Mota a écrit : I have a doubt about a situation. The upstream source code is GPL3+. Packaging is a derivative work and I think that it must be GPL. So, GPL-3+, right? Or can the debian/* be GPL-2+? Dear Eriberto, if your packaging work