At 2:32 PM +0900 2006-09-01, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Excuse me? The GPL *explicitly* approves and authorizes (not to
mention implicitly encourages) modification and redistribution without
conditions other than providing source. That's exactly what license
means.
Right, and they
At 1:39 AM -0500 2006-09-01, Brad Knowles wrote:
If you want to get into a diatribe about licensing, please be aware that
I'm a BSD guy, and I've found myself surrounded by a bunch of GPL types,
so license-wise I've tended to say pretty quiet.
Sorry, I meant ... stay pretty quiet. That
Brad Knowles said the following on 2006/09/01 01:24 AM:
This is the key point that was not coming across to me, at least not
until much later in the exchange. Speaking only for myself, I seriously
misunderstood what you were asking and why, which greatly colored my
responses.
My apologies, I
Brad Knowles said the following on 2006/09/01 08:39 AM:
If you want to get into a diatribe about licensing, please be aware
that I'm a BSD guy, and I've found myself surrounded by a bunch of
GPL types, so license-wise I've tended to say pretty quiet.
Note, the issues raised are not unique to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Has anybody at Mailman asked CPanel, Plesk, or Apple for source and
been refused? Or one of their customers, and been refused because
they were under NDA? If we haven't asked, how can we bitch?
I asked cPanel a few years
Brad Knowles writes:
I just don't have the answers to the questions you're asking me.
That's fine.
Moreover, I don't think that it's reasonable for you to respond to me
in this manner. What have I ever done to you?
Since you ask, lots of nice things. I've certainly benefited from
your
Todd Zullinger writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Has anybody at Mailman asked CPanel, Plesk, or Apple for source and
been refused? Or one of their customers, and been refused because
they were under NDA? If we haven't asked, how can we bitch?
[...]
I've since had the displeasure
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you actually do have the right to do so, yes, please.
I do, AFAIK. Mailman is GPL'd and I have legitimate root access on
that system so I have access to the source code. AIUI, the GPL
doesn't permit them to restrict
At 9:30 PM +0900 2006-09-01, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Your post asks for more than the GPL does. I agree that it would be
good if these companies would participate actively in the community.
But I'm more confused than ever why you cited the GPL in support of
that, since you write:
I'm
Todd Zullinger writes:
I do, AFAIK. Mailman is GPL'd and I have legitimate root access on
that system so I have access to the source code. AIUI, the GPL
doesn't permit them to restrict what I do with the source that I
get.
You have to actually receive a distribution to have GPL rights.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You have to actually receive a distribution to have GPL rights.
Merely having access to somebody else's copy is not enough.
The system owner most certainly allows me to access and use the source
that he was provided as part
Todd Zullinger writes:
If you have reason to believe that there are other factors which
would prohibit the system owner from sharing that source code,
feel free to point those out.
There are none to worry about, except that he/she arbitrarily decides
he/she doesn't want to.
I'm just
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm just concerned that sharing might not be the intention of the
system owner.
No problem. Sharing this source code is perfectly fine with the
system owner. I know him well enough to know that implicitly.
- --
Todd
On 8/31/06 4:09 PM, Brad Knowles [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually, I think either unapproved or unauthorized are the most
appropriate terms. After all, the code is released under the GPL,
and anyone who is making modifications to that code and then making
their modified version available to
At 9:06 AM +0200 2006-08-31, Bretton Vine wrote:
Well a lot has been generated in this discussion already, now it's just a
case of summarising it and having someone edit. I like writing, and would
happily contribute but I can drag on a bit so need a good editor :-P
Yeah, I have that
Brad Knowles writes:
At 2:07 AM +0200 2006-08-31, Bretton Vine wrote:
(locally) it's been referred to as a be strict in what you send, relaxed
in
what you receive approach but not everyone adheres to (or is aware of)
this
way of looking at things and it seems antiquated to
John W. Baxter said the following on 2006/08/31 06:58 PM:
And, unfortunately, were I preparing a list of options for a You really
ought to look at these options and check that they are set appropriately
paragraph, I probably wouldn't include this one. There are so many which
are more
Bretton Vine sent the message below at 10:08 8/31/2006:
John W. Baxter said the following on 2006/08/31 06:58 PM:
And, unfortunately, were I preparing a list of options for a You really
ought to look at these options and check that they are set appropriately
paragraph, I probably wouldn't
--On August 31, 2006 7:08:22 PM +0200 Bretton Vine [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Perhaps a list of you /really/ should set these settings to X would be
useful to people short on time :-) Of course you could just bundle the
product that way in the first place but where's the fun in that?
To which
Dragon said the following on 2006/08/31 07:44 PM:
But if you don't like the defaults or have a reason to choose a
different setting, you can change them at your own risk either through
configuring each list or by overriding the setting in mm_cfg.py
I'm not criticising, and I'm more than
Dragon said the following on 2006/08/31 07:44 PM:
The fact that people like Brad and Mark and others are willing to expend
large amounts of their time responding to queries here should be taken as
what it is, another gift to the community. I think they have gone above
and beyond the call of
Steve Burling said the following on 2006/08/31 07:55 PM:
Could we maybe leave this poor dead horse to rest in peace?
Only if I get a last word in edgewise :-)
Apparently, many of the posters to this list believe (with some
justification, imho) that it should take explicit action to undo safe
At 10:06 AM -0700 2006-08-31, John W. Baxter quoted Brad Knowles
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
We're not a commercial environment, and we've actually had pretty bad
experiences with people/companies that are in commercial environments
taking our software and making unapproved modifications to it, or
At 8:44 PM +0200 2006-08-31, Bretton Vine wrote:
The point I was illustrating is that if you have to justify the rationale
behind a default setting to a third-party-decision-maker -- what is the most
appropriate and concise response?
This is the key point that was not coming across to me,
At 8:25 PM +0200 2006-08-31, Bretton Vine wrote:
I view it differently. I have had great feedback and I highly doubt either
of the parties mentioned viewed a response as a restraining, difficult
exercise. I /really/ use lists to their full advantage and with some in
particular have never
Brad Knowles writes:
At 10:06 AM -0700 2006-08-31, John W. Baxter quoted Brad Knowles
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
We're not a commercial environment, and we've actually had pretty bad
experiences with people/companies that are in commercial environments
taking our software and making
Brad Knowles said the following on 2006/08/31 12:09 AM:
snip useful comments
We prefer to have this option default to on, because it is safer that
way, and people can always choose to set their choice to be more
permissive.
(locally) it's been referred to as a be strict in what you send,
At 2:07 AM +0200 2006-08-31, Bretton Vine wrote:
(locally) it's been referred to as a be strict in what you send, relaxed in
what you receive approach but not everyone adheres to (or is aware of) this
way of looking at things and it seems antiquated to some.
It's called the Postel
At 4:56 AM +0200 2006-08-31, Bretton Vine wrote:
So far my experience has been wonderful with the product, good and bad with
the documentation, and rather difficult in terms of user-error, namely mine.
I am of the opinion that all software sucks, but some sucks less than
others. IMO,
29 matches
Mail list logo
