First and foremost, please stop top posting. We Are here to hold
discussions about licencing, and it's very difficult to do so when
your comments are wholy separated from the context in which they
belong. You also should stop using HTML; a gmail account or similar
should enable you to do this if
On Sun, May 21, 2006 at 04:17:52PM -0500, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
I'm afraid I have more interesting things to do than helping non-free
software developers to get their non-free crap in the non-free archive.
Good, but you shouldn't decide what others have to do. Some people are
interested
the project by not consulting you first is so much bullshit, because *they*
are the ones who bear the primary liability from distributing these
packages, and other developers (as opposed to mirror operators) bear none at
all. They didn't ask you because Debian is not a democracy and random
On Sun, May 21, 2006 at 05:03:28PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
Er, of course we all might be affected by it, but the ftpmasters would be
affected *way* more by getting sued than *we* would be affected by their
getting sued, so I think it's ridiculously presumptuous to criticize the
Who should
To all, for who freedom is important!
You, who is sitting in front of your monitors! Everyone, who is reading these
lines! You can just look through them or you can read each word thoroughly.
It doesn’t matter in which language you are reading these words. Just read
them. Think. Make up your
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 01:08:17AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Indeed, they will bear the *primary* liability. However if legal action
is taken against them or our mirror operators because of their decision,
the whole distribution process might
Le dimanche 21 mai 2006 à 17:03 -0700, Steve Langasek a écrit :
This is the whole point of the discussion.
Not that I can see. Your preceding post focused on the *who* and the *how*
of the decision, *not* on the what.
This is all entangled. Had this decision been taken in a transparent way
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 10:25:35AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le dimanche 21 mai 2006 à 17:03 -0700, Steve Langasek a écrit :
No, I'm acknowledging that the ftpmasters have no obligation to do as *you*
say. The ftp-masters aren't the ones trying to tell other people what to do
in this
On Mon, 2006-05-22 at 10:50 +0200, Michael Meskes wrote:
Again this logic doesn't seem to work for me. If I was offering warez
on my server I couldn't become legal again by just removing it. My
prior action would still get me sued, doesn't it? And no, just saying
I thought it was okay, doesn't
On 5/22/06, Russ Allbery [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Martijn van Oosterhout [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Given the word estoppel only has meaning in jurisdictions deriving
from English common law, I think it'd be silly to assume it works the
way you think it does in any of the other jurisdictions
Kern Sibbald wrote:
John Goerzen wrote:
Can you all take a look at the below new license? I took a quick look
and it looks good to me.
This revised license looks DFSG-free to me. One note, though:
Linking:
Bacula may be linked with any libraries permitted under the GPL,
or with any
Le lundi 22 mai 2006 à 10:46 +0200, Michael Meskes a écrit :
And I'm pissed of that so much seems to happen behind the scenes and I
as a normal developer who did not go to Mexico do not get the info even
if I ask, but instead people are just told to shut up.
Even people in Oaxtepec have learnt
Le dimanche 21 mai 2006 à 21:16 -0500, Tom Marble a écrit :
I find it very sad that people can get this impression after coming to
Debconf.
Realize that sometimes in e-mail it is difficult to convey subtlety or
nuanced meaning. Even though my experience with Debian is only three
years
Heya,
Michael Meskes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[Java flamewar]
DPL, I wonder Why the Sun-Java package is not handled the same as any
other package. What makes it so special that it deserves special
treatment?
Isn't this a discrimination against all other packages? :-)
ACK. This is the most
Tom Marble [EMAIL PROTECTED]
If Debian is so important to you then why do you stop at saying
that I am mistaken instead of going on to educate me on a project
you care so much about?
Some Debian Developers (DDs) are essentially mercenary. Others
are also troubled by the events of debconf
John Goerzen [EMAIL PROTECTED] forwarded:
Linking:
Bacula may be linked with any libraries permitted under the GPL,
or with any non-GPLed libraries, including OpenSSL, that are
required for its proper functioning, providing the source code of
those non-GPLed libraries is non-proprietary and
Josselin Mouette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Le dimanche 21 mai 2006 à 21:16 -0500, Tom Marble a écrit :
sophistication in Debian technology. My point here is that I have
developed the impression that Debian is more than technology...
This is getting more and more true, and this is the point I
Adam Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[...]
license agreement; and (f) you agree to defend and indemnify Sun
and its licensors from and against any damages, costs, liabilities,
settlement amounts and/or expenses (including attorneys' fees)
incurred in connection with any claim, lawsuit or
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 10:50:22AM +0200, Michael Meskes wrote:
On Sun, May 21, 2006 at 04:04:37PM -0500, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
Fears are unfounded, we can at any time terminate the license by removing
java!
Again this logic doesn't seem to work for me. If I was offering warez on
my
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 12:03:25PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le lundi 22 mai 2006 à 10:46 +0200, Michael Meskes a écrit :
And I'm pissed of that so much seems to happen behind the scenes and I
as a normal developer who did not go to Mexico do not get the info even
if I ask, but instead
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 11:22:25AM +0200, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
Heya,
Michael Meskes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[Java flamewar]
DPL, I wonder Why the Sun-Java package is not handled the same as any
other package. What makes it so special that it deserves special
treatment?
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 01:39:47PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 12:35:41PM +0200, Michael Meskes wrote:
You are told by a programmer that you are allowed to offer their
software on your server, but the programmer also tells you that his
statement is legally not
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 01:35:33PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
The difference would be that while you would act against the original
author's wishes if you were to put warez on your server, the same isn't
true about Sun Java. In fact, Sun explicitely asked us to please
distribute their
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
MJ Ray a écrit :
[...]
A virtual package name is a functional label, not a product name.
Java is the name of an island and a natural language too.
I'm surprised if Sun can prevent use of a word in this way.
A function that is used to call a
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 08:34:22AM +0200, Michael Meskes wrote:
the project by not consulting you first is so much bullshit, because *they*
are the ones who bear the primary liability from distributing these
packages, and other developers (as opposed to mirror operators) bear none at
all.
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 01:08:17AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
By reading your email, I feel you are acknowledging the fact the
ftp-masters cabal (I can't name it otherwise after seeing their behavior
IRL) is treating other developers as second-class contributors who
should just do as they
On Sun, 21 May 2006 15:55:53 -0700 Steve Langasek wrote:
They didn't ask you because Debian is not a democracy and random
opinions on this decision *don't* matter.
What is it, then?
A constitutional monarchy?
--
:-( This Universe is buggy! Where's the Creator's BTS? ;-)
A virtual package name is a functional label, not a product name.
Java is the name of an island and a natural language too.
I'm surprised if Sun can prevent use of a word in this way.
A function that is used to call a runtime, compiler, etc of the Java(tm)
language!
Java? is a
MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I think that DRM-inhibiting licences are possible, but the
s/are/that follow the DFSG are/ #oops!
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi,
Is there any legal reason why sharpmusique is not in Debian, given that
multiple .deb packages already exist?
Charles
--
Our fortune
Is your
Shaven face
It's our best
Advertising space
Burma-Shave
http://burma-shave.org/jingles/1953/our_fortune
signature.asc
Description: Digital
Hi all,
Simon Phipps, Chief Open Source Officer at Sun Microsystems:
JDK on GNU/Linux: Something Wonderful
16 May 2006
http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/webmink?entry=jdk_on_gnu_linux_something
Responds that it's OK to distribute along with GCJ, GNU/Classpath and
so on - that was one of the
31 matches
Mail list logo
