Hi Roberto Sanchez,
I came across the following while reading the wxWindows documentation
(from the wxwin2.4-doc package):
We also acknowledge the author of XFIG, the excellent Unix drawing tool,
from the source of which we have borrowed some spline drawing code. His
copyright is included
--- Adam Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió: Hi Roberto Sanchez,
Roberto, this is a standard permissive MIT/BSD-style licence that has no
advertising clause and is GPL compatible. The ambiguity in the without
fee section is frequently misinterpreted (it means you can do everything
listed
Im looking into packaging quake 1 for debian at the moment, and I
noticed the follwing clause in the license which I think might mean Im
permitted to include the whole compressed zip file inside a package
instead of having to get the user to download it in and postinst script
(like the nvidia
Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
[This is starting to shift away from the GFDL so I modified the
subject. Georg, I can suppress you from the Cc: if you wish so.]
On Sun, Apr 27, 2003 at 11:25:43PM -0400,
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
a message of 29 lines which said:
Naturally, I'm
Alan Woodland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Im looking into packaging quake 1 for debian at the moment, and I
noticed the follwing clause in the license which I think might mean Im
permitted to include the whole compressed zip file inside a package
instead of having to get the user to download
Alan Woodland wrote:
Im looking into packaging quake 1 for debian at the moment
Quake 1 was in debian before. I forget why we dropped it, but I think it
had little to do with licensing and a lot to do with the maintainer at
the time. Anyway, I'm pretty sure this license was discussed a/ long
Sam Hartman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Henning == Henning Makholm [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Henning Scripsit Michael D. Crawford [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I don't have any invariant sections in any of them, but each of
them specifies a brief back cover text:
Is that a problem?
It can be misleading or wrong, and you'll never be able to take it
out.
But what if it isn't? Must we only have the black-and-white distinction that
invariant sections or cover texts are never allowed, or could we allow them if
they are truthful?
In my case my only desire is to guarantee
Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Alan Woodland wrote:
Im looking into packaging quake 1 for debian at the moment
Quake 1 was in debian before. I forget why we dropped it, but I think it
had little to do with licensing and a lot to do with the maintainer at
the time. Anyway, I'm pretty
Glenn == Glenn Maynard [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Glenn On Sat, May 03, 2003 at 08:31:15PM -0400, Sam Hartman
Glenn wrote:
How is this any worse than an advertizing clause or a
requirement to make a statement in supporting documentation?
We consider both of those free.
10 matches
Mail list logo