[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I watched Sun's Simon Phipps' talk at debconf 2006 few weeks ago.
It was mentioned that the choice of venue was useless and would be
removed from CDDL, thus making CDDL DSFG-compliant.
There is no consensus that choice of venue clauses are not
DSFG-compliant, anyway.
--
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Florian Weimer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
* Ottavio Caruso:
I'd like to post some Debian disk images, created from original
Debian packages, to some sites via http or bittorrent. What legal
obligations have I or the hosting site? If the packages are all from
the
On Sat, 2 Dec 2006 14:40:39 + Anthony W. Youngman wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Florian Weimer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
[...]
My understanding of the GPL is that you must make the sources
available, on your server.
WRONG (imho).
*IF* Ottavio is a private individual, then he
Anthony W. Youngman wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Florian Weimer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
* Ottavio Caruso:
I'd like to post some Debian disk images, created from original
Debian packages, to some sites via http or bittorrent. What
legal
obligations have I or the hosting site?
Hi,
I saw the swift reaction on bug #276302: [Sun License for JavaCC] which
has been an issue for years (upstream claims it is free software under a
modern bsd license, but some files had additional restriction). Getting
a real answer, an acknowledgment that this is a problem with regard to
the
Marco d'Itri wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I watched Sun's Simon Phipps' talk at debconf 2006 few weeks ago.
It was mentioned that the choice of venue was useless and would be
removed from CDDL, thus making CDDL DSFG-compliant.
There is no consensus that choice of venue clauses are not
Le samedi 02 décembre 2006 18:18, Tom Marble a écrit :
Marco d'Itri wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I watched Sun's Simon Phipps' talk at debconf 2006 few weeks ago.
It was mentioned that the choice of venue was useless and would be
removed from CDDL, thus making CDDL DSFG-compliant.
Tom Marble Tom.Marble at Sun.COM writes:
Until very, very recently this hasn't even been possible as
we are fully aware that NetBeans has had various non-free
dependencies (which would have blocked it's inclusion in main).
Thus the primary rationale for liberating javac and JavaHelp
as part
Le samedi 02 décembre 2006 à 11:18 -0600, Tom Marble a écrit :
Why is this important? Because Sun has several software projects
that are licensed under CDDL that we would really, really like
accepted into Debian. The key example is our NetBeans IDE.
The purpose of packaging NetBeans for
Josselin Mouette wrote:
Please note that we don't accept software in Debian just because it is
useful, but also because it is free.
Understood.
That said, I agree with some of the arguments given about the
choice-of-venue clause. It is a bad clause, but I don't think it makes a
piece of
10 matches
Mail list logo
