On Thu, 31 May 2007 12:13:25 -0400 Joe Smith wrote: > > "Francesco Poli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Sam Hocevar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> 1. The GPLv3: the latest draft did not raise major objections > >from > -legal > > > >I don't think that this is an accurate description of the discussion. > >See http://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > I'm not sure if I would charcterize my analysis as including major > objections, but rather some concerns. > I explicitly stated that I did n ot actually find DFSG problems, > although two complicated portions were not analyized. > So I would say I had concerns but not nessisrally objections.
I am sorry for not being clear enough: I meant to refer to the *thread* that started from your message, not just to your message. I now realize that, unfortunately, the rest thread was on the next month and hence is not linked by the web archives! I apologize, the rest of the thread starts here: http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2007/04/msg00001.html -- http://frx.netsons.org/doc/nanodocs/testing_workstation_install.html Need to read a Debian testing installation walk-through? ..................................................... Francesco Poli . GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
pgpfEsqibab2n.pgp
Description: PGP signature
