On Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 03:36:57PM +0200, Ondřej Surý wrote:
apt-get is licensed GPLv2 and thus incompatible with AGPLv3.
No, apt is GPL-2+.
cyrus-{imapd,sasl} has BSD-style license and thus incompatible with AGPLv3.
OpenLDAP has BSD-style (OpenLDAP) license and thus incompatible with AGPLv3.
On Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 05:22:03PM +0200, Ondřej Surý wrote:
Also it would cultivate the debate here if you have presented your arguments
(e.g. explain why I might be mistaken) instead of presenting just the ad
hominem arguments. Thanks.
I am not a lawyer, though I work for lawyers. It
On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 11:31:55PM +0200, Francesco Poli wrote:
For reasons I won't elaborate on here (they would drive us far away
from the topic under discussion), I consider the GNU GPL v3 as a
license with a broken copyleft mechanism (at least for some aspects).
Hence, whenever I want to
Egad, it sounds like you actually live in an evil parallel universe where
idealism is inherently dishonest and false. That universe must really suck. :)
There's a difference between idealism and lying about adhering to one's
ideals.
Please, try to remember the spirit of those promises, rather
3. http://www.mp3licensing.com/royalty/software.html
I wonder whether it's time to cease all mp3 players from Debian as well.
FWIW, this licensing change occurred in mid-2001.
So, where is that public-domain software for extracting ZOO-files?
Somebody must find it and then create Debian-package of it. IMHO
creating new ZOO-archives is not very important for us.
IIRC, the ZOO extracters were Ooz and Looz.
Since it seems rather unclear whether or not the GFDL and OPL
are DFSG-free with all permutations of their optional clauses,
is anyone suggesting that documentation in Debian be held
to a different standard than the DFSG?
On the other hand, if the various restrictions on modification
and printed
7 matches
Mail list logo
