Re: Why LGPLv3/CC-by-sa-v3.0 for the logo?

2012-09-23 Thread Francesco Poli
On Sun, 23 Sep 2012 07:44:55 +0900 Charles Plessy wrote: Le Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 06:34:52PM +0200, Francesco Poli a écrit : In the meanwhile, what I was proposing was that the licensing of the Debian Open Use Logo should not create a deliberate incompatibility with either the GPLv2 or

Re: Why LGPLv3/CC-by-sa-v3.0 for the logo?

2012-09-23 Thread Rox 64
http://www.inventati.org/frx/frx-gpg-key-transition-2010.txtSo what are the supposed weakness of both versions of the GPL?

Re: Why LGPLv3/CC-by-sa-v3.0 for the logo?

2012-09-22 Thread Francesco Poli
On Thu, 20 Sep 2012 21:52:58 + Clint Adams wrote: 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

Re: Why LGPLv3/CC-by-sa-v3.0 for the logo?

2012-09-22 Thread Francesco Poli
On Fri, 21 Sep 2012 09:00:08 +0200 Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 11:31:55PM +0200, Francesco Poli wrote: There are two issues with your previous reply: * it was not clear that your request for more info also included questions about the particular copyright licenses

Re: Why LGPLv3/CC-by-sa-v3.0 for the logo?

2012-09-22 Thread Charles Plessy
Le Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 06:34:52PM +0200, Francesco Poli a écrit : In the meanwhile, what I was proposing was that the licensing of the Debian Open Use Logo should not create a deliberate incompatibility with either the GPLv2 or the GPLv3. Hi Francesco, The Debian Open Use Logo without « 

Re: Why LGPLv3/CC-by-sa-v3.0 for the logo?

2012-09-21 Thread Stefano Zacchiroli
On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 11:31:55PM +0200, Francesco Poli wrote: There are two issues with your previous reply: * it was not clear that your request for more info also included questions about the particular copyright licenses to be chosen YMMV, I guess. * the reply itself was only sent

Re: Why LGPLv3/CC-by-sa-v3.0 for the logo?

2012-09-20 Thread Francesco Poli
On Wed, 12 Sep 2012 09:17:53 +0200 Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: On Sun, Sep 09, 2012 at 09:31:41PM +0200, Francesco Poli wrote: I am following up to your August bits from the DPL, since I still have to understand why it was suggested to dual license the Open Use Logo with Debian under LGPLv3+

Re: Why LGPLv3/CC-by-sa-v3.0 for the logo?

2012-09-20 Thread Clint Adams
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