Can everybody please calm down and avoid shooting each other? ;-) There's been hamster-beating questions, mental health mudslinging and more...
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 1) The MPL requires you to make the source code to your modifications > available for six-to-twelve months electronically _or_ to make it > available on the same media as the executable version. We do the latter. Will you ask a for a legal opinion that the archive is media and not an Electronic Distribution Mechanism or do you think the archive is an EDM and we're still fine or shall I ask or does someone object to the whole idea of checking this decision? > [...] > so when what you write is written in a way that people will misinterpret > as an authoritative answer, that's a problem, which is only compounded > if what you say is also incorrect. I think that's the real problem. Even if Francesco Poli became a DD, I'd still be unhappy with that sort of post. It's sort of ironic that part of this seems to be based on old posts from another who posted in a way that people misinterpret as an authoritative answer. All the HINAL and HINADD posting is not helpful: being a non-DD non-lawyer is not necessarily a problem. As some posts in this thread show, DDs post stupid stuff too. > 4) That a license is DFSG-free [...] Licences are never DFSG-free. The S stands for Software, not Licence. Licences just help some software to follow the DFSG. Regards, -- MJR/slef My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/ Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
