* Joerg Jaspert:
So, I have some packages in NEW that are MPL only licensed. Whats the
current way to go? Reject, accept?
Accept. Debian currently distributes quite a few packages licensed
under the MPL. I'm not sure if it makes sense to revert that decision
at this stage.
--
To
Hi Michael and Justin,
Thank you for your help! I've submitted a bug (#359707) and will follow
its progress.
Ed
--
Edward H. Hill III, PhD
office: MIT Dept. of EAPS; Rm 54-1424; 77 Massachusetts Ave.
Cambridge, MA 02139-4307
emails: [EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL
Florian Weimer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Joerg Jaspert:
So, I have some packages in NEW that are MPL only licensed. Whats the
current way to go? Reject, accept?
Accept. Debian currently distributes quite a few packages licensed
under the MPL.
Quite a few? What packages are those?
On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 07:04:50 -0800 (PST) Walter Landry wrote:
Florian Weimer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Joerg Jaspert:
So, I have some packages in NEW that are MPL only licensed. Whats
the current way to go? Reject, accept?
Accept. Debian currently distributes quite a few
On 3/27/06, Don Armstrong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 27 Mar 2006, Raul Miller wrote:
I find it hard to believe that this license has any relevance in the
context of non-copyright issues (issues of use which have not been
specifically enumerated by either copyright law or the license).
(I think this sub-thread is heading off on a tangent,
I've cut a bunch of material which seems to lead
nowhere significant. If I cut something important,
please feel free to correct me.)
On 3/27/06, MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And, I'll grant that the concept of copy and distribute is
Raul Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 3/26/06, Walter Landry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I can give you a simple example, however, of a case where
[with caveats] word format is suitable: some drawings could
be saved in some word format if the version of word in question is
widely
Whats debian-legals position about the MPL?
Looking at google I see a lot of Summary - non-free and Not really
non-free mails.
So, I have some packages in NEW that are MPL only licensed. Whats the
current way to go? Reject, accept?
Reject, unless the authors have announced relicensing
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If so, I expect it will be more
efficient if we can approach the FSF for a blanket license change.
No; from what we can tell, RMS is personally blocking even the simplest and
most obvious license changes, and nobody with authority in the FSF will go up
against him,
9 matches
Mail list logo