Hi Simon,
On Fri, Feb 17, 2006 at 10:22:32AM +0100, Simon Josefsson wrote:
Hi. A newly approved IETF document contains reference code for SHA-2,
and they propose to use the following license:
1.1 License
Royalty free license to copy and use this software is granted,
provided that
Hi. A newly approved IETF document contains reference code for SHA-2,
and they propose to use the following license:
1.1 License
Royalty free license to copy and use this software is granted,
provided that redistributed derivative works do not contain
misleading author or version
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi Simon,
On Fri, Feb 17, 2006 at 10:22:32AM +0100, Simon Josefsson wrote:
Hi. A newly approved IETF document contains reference code for SHA-2,
and they propose to use the following license:
1.1 License
Royalty free license to copy and use
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Royalty free license to copy and use this software is granted,
provided that redistributed derivative works do not contain
misleading author or version information. Royalty free license is
also granted to make and use derivative works
On Fri, Feb 17, 2006 at 11:27:09AM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Royalty free license to copy and use this software is granted,
provided that redistributed derivative works do not contain
misleading author or version information. Royalty free
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi. A newly approved IETF document contains reference code for SHA-2,
and they propose to use the following license:
Is this DFSG-free?
It looks fine to me, but if it's still a draft then I think it would be
useful to use a wording less vague than misleading author or
Scripsit Raul Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Perhaps we should consider amending section 4 of the DFSG so
that instead of only allowing one restriction on modification (changes
must be distributed in source form as patches to the unmodified
sources) to allowing any restrictions on a Debian Free
Marco d'Itri [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi. A newly approved IETF document contains reference code for SHA-2,
and they propose to use the following license:
Is this DFSG-free?
It looks fine to me, but if it's still a draft then I think it would be
useful to use a
On Fri, 17 Feb 2006, Marco d'Itri wrote:
It looks fine to me, but if it's still a draft then I think it would be
useful to use a wording less vague than misleading author or version
information.
Agreed. It's fine to say that the package must be labelled as to
modifications made, but this
On Thu, Feb 16, 2006 at 07:31:59AM -0800, Jim Westveer wrote:
Natarajan,
I am most likely not the person to be asking these questions of.
You ask:
Can I conduct a Course called Debian Certified Engineer (DCE)
without asking permission anybody
You may want to ask this question on the
Adam McKenna wrote:
I don't know of any device that rejects files of a particular encoding. Can
you give an example of such a device?
My portable music player barfs pretty badly on anything that isn't ASCII.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe.
On Fri, Feb 17, 2006 at 06:32:58PM -0500, Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
And, further, the GFDL says I must preserve invariant sections
unaltered in their text, not unaltered in their octects; I seriously
doubt that'd count...
Would I be in violation if I was to take a GNU manual, untar it,
12 matches
Mail list logo
