On 5/19/06, Jonas Karlsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
2006/5/19, MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > "Jonas Karlsson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > This is not true. From the DLJ FAQ > > (http://download.java.net/dlj/DLJ-FAQ-v1.1.txt): > > The DLJ FAQ seems to contradict the licence in other places, > such as the need to indemnify Sun for a wide range of things. > Why not wait for Sun to figure out WTF they really mean and > present a consistent and understandable licence and FAQ? > I can't see what part of the FAQ you're refering to. I can see no contradiction between the DLJ and the DLJ FAQ regarding indemnation. You have to agree that Sun is not responsible for anything that affect your computer, but you don't have to take responsibility for what Sun's code do to others.
While reading, I noticed a few contradictions. In those cases, the license and package README take precedence. WRT indemnification, it is not a very important issue to us. We don't offer a warranty. When a project fails and support contracts and SLAs are being litigated against, a lot of finger pointing to third partys occurs. If a finger is pointed against sun, they don't want to be liabile.
> > [...] and allow the user to review them before download. > > So how does one do that if not clickthrough? > You don't have to make them click "I agree". You could just have a download link.
Then the download is the click-thru. The user must make a yes/no choice after seeing license. Moving where it happens doesn't change what it is. I'm REALLY not sure how LiveCDs are going to handle it. There would be no install step. I guess java could be a wrapper -- Carlo J. Calica _______________________________________________ gobolinux-devel mailing list gobolinux-devel@lists.gobolinux.org http://lists.gobolinux.org/mailman/listinfo/gobolinux-devel
