Nauty [1] is pretty much the standard software for graph isomorphism
testing, and is used by a several other pieces of research software
(e.g. polymake, which I have ITPed [2]). Unfortunately from the
Debian point of view, the distribution conditions are somewhat
restrictive.
Copyright
On Jan 24, 2008 12:23 AM, Ben Finney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's still unfortunate to have confusing and unclear language in the
licence, but it's not non-free.
I'll reserve judgement until we can know that this claim of retain
copyright is not all-inclusive.
Well, as ever in these
On Thu Jan 24 09:35, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Copyright (1984-2007) Brendan McKay. All rights
reserved. Permission is hereby given for use and/or
distribution with the exception of sale for profit or
application with nontrivial military significance. You must
On Jan 24, 2008 8:35 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Copyright (1984-2007) Brendan McKay. All rights
reserved. Permission is hereby given for use and/or
distribution with the exception of sale for profit or
application with nontrivial military significance.
This
On Jan 24, 2008 9:47 AM, Matthew Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This looks like it gives us permission to distribute it in non-free if
you can get it licenced under a DFSG-compatible licence.
I assume you mean if you *can't* get it licensed under a
DFSG-compatible licence. On that basis, I
On Jan 24, 2008 7:41 AM, Arnoud Engelfriet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is actually a very intriguing question. If I have a shell account
on someone's computer, and I can copy a binary that resides somewhere
in /bin (or wherever), is the work being distributed to me?
toad:~ ls -l /bin/ls
On Thu Jan 24 11:37, John Halton wrote:
It seems clear enough that the administrators of toad are
propagating /bin/ls. And that propagation is one that enables
other parties to make or receive copies. Nor is this mere
interaction ... with no transfer of a copy - *running* /bin/ls would
fit
On Jan 24, 2008 11:41 AM, Matthew Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu Jan 24 11:37, John Halton wrote:
It seems clear enough that the administrators of toad are
propagating /bin/ls. And that propagation is one that enables
other parties to make or receive copies. Nor is this mere
Hi,
I have some small problem with Gnash that might be extensible to other
packages, so I'm asking here to find out if anyone else has had that
problem too and how did they manage it.
Gnash is GNU's free Flash player. It is now licensed under GPLv3 (it
was previously GPLv2 or above). It has a
Matthew Johnson wrote:
On Thu Jan 24 11:37, John Halton wrote:
It seems clear enough that the administrators of toad are
propagating /bin/ls. And that propagation is one that enables
other parties to make or receive copies. Nor is this mere
interaction ... with no transfer of a copy -
Hello there,
I was looking for a tshirt and i saw this one [1] which has the
official logo and afaik, these shirts just can be given as a pack with
debian products or made by a DD (but can't be sold, though)
(How) Should i ask politely to the people running this site/shop to
remove the tshirt?
On Jan 24, 2008 2:31 PM, Mauro Lizaur [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(How) Should i ask politely to the people running this site/shop to
remove the tshirt?
Any advices would be great. i dont really want to send them an email
with something like hey remove that tshirt because i say so ;)
You could
On 11274 March 1977, Matthew Johnson wrote:
I can ask the author if would distribute under some DFSG free license,
but in the case that he declines, is there any other clarification
needed before it can be included in non-free?
This looks like it gives us permission to distribute it in
Hi Miriam,
On 2008-01-24 13:49 +0100, Miriam Ruiz wrote:
I have some small problem with Gnash that might be extensible to other
packages, so I'm asking here to find out if anyone else has had that
problem too and how did they manage it.
Gnash is GNU's free Flash player. It is now licensed
2008/1/24, Sven Joachim [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hi Miriam,
You will be interested that Trolltech has released Qt 3.3.8 under GPL 3:
Thanks, it really solves a great part of the problem, but I have no
idea on how to check that there are no other GPLv2 only libraries
directly or indirectly linked,
Dear legal beagles, all I know is if one day I couldn't do
[EMAIL PROTECTED] dpkg -l apt-get --print-uris ... wget ...
to examine the .debs that were Debian debs but slightly modified by
Dreamhost (or other such web host), well that would mean the whole
Free Software concept had come to a
Antiques TV Newsletter body {
background-image:url(http://www.antiques.tv/press/images/mailshotBGA
.jpg);
background-repeat:repeat-y; background-position:center;
background-color:#ff; font-size: 13px; color:#66; font-family:
Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; } a:link {color:
On Fri, Jan 25, 2008 at 03:33:34AM +0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So Dear legal beagles, please close this loophole, if any.
As outlined previously in the discussion, I don't think there *is* a
loophole here. Anyone using GPL v.3 software (which includes almost
all GNU software issued since GPL
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So Dear legal beagles, please close this loophole, if any.
To remove this misapprehension: debian-legal is a discussion forum
only. We have no special power to *change* license terms.
If there's a loophole, all we can do is expose it. Addressing the
loophole will be
John Halton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
That said, I would be *delighted* if someone can show me where I've
gone wrong in my analysis. I don't claim to be a world expert on GPL
v.3!
Here's a 2003 debian-legal discussion about the ASP loophole:
Miriam Ruiz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have no idea on how to check that there are no other GPLv2 only
libraries directly or indirectly linked, apart from spending hours
checking manually.
This seems like an ideal case to promote the proposed format
On Fri, Jan 25, 2008 at 08:26:19AM +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
Here's a 2003 debian-legal discussion about the ASP loophole:
URL:http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2003/03/msg00755.html
Thanks. The distinction here is that in the classic ASP loophole
situation you are accessing the
On Thu Jan 24 22:02, John Halton wrote:
On Fri, Jan 25, 2008 at 08:26:19AM +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
Here's a 2003 debian-legal discussion about the ASP loophole:
URL:http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2003/03/msg00755.html
(Incidentally, I'm assuming that the earlier suggestion of
23 matches
Mail list logo
