* MJ Ray:
Kevin B. McCarty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I would be interested to hear your opinions on the Geant4 Software
License, version 1.0 [1]. [...]
[1] http://geant4.web.cern.ch/geant4/license/LICENSE.html
I think it is clearly GPL-incompatible (as you noted) for reasons
similar to the old
Joe Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]
How exactly does automatic upstream licence violate the DFSG?
This is how I think it *might* (as written previously, I'm unsure):
1. what is meant by entering into a separate written license agreement?
2. is it the same licence if it's the original+total donation
Florian Weimer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* MJ Ray:
of clauses 4 (automatic donation to upstream),
[...] You retain your exploitation rights, you only
grant upstream a free license. This is just a form of copyleft, only
that the source license is granted to upstream, not the party that
receives the
Kevin B. McCarty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I would be interested to hear your opinions on the Geant4 Software
License, version 1.0 [1]. [...]
[1] http://geant4.web.cern.ch/geant4/license/LICENSE.html
I think it is clearly GPL-incompatible (as you noted) for reasons
similar to the old BSD licence
MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Kevin B. McCarty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I would be interested to hear your opinions on the Geant4 Software
License, version 1.0 [1]. [...]
[1] http://geant4.web.cern.ch/geant4/license/LICENSE.html
I think it is clearly GPL
Joe Smith writes:
MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Kevin B. McCarty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I would be interested to hear your opinions on the Geant4 Software
License, version 1.0 [1]. [...]
[1] http://geant4.web.cern.ch/geant4/license/LICENSE.html
I think
Hi debian-legal,
I would be interested to hear your opinions on the Geant4 Software
License, version 1.0 [1]. Until a few days ago Geant4 did not actually
have a license, making it technically undistributable; the new license
applies to the just-released Geant4 version 8.1 (and presumably
7 matches
Mail list logo
