On 2009-04-17, Ken Arromdee wrote:
> (And I was also under the impression that Debian follows the wishes of the
> copyright holder, so it doesn't matter if this argument has any legal merit,
> just that the FSF makes it.)
Note that there's no FSF copyright code in the xapian-bindings upstream
tar
On 2009-04-17, MJ Ray wrote:
> Olly Betts wrote:
>> For reference, this is #513796 in the BTS.
>
> Will you summarise/link or should we cc?
Good question. Since I didn't Cc: the start of the thread, I'll update
the bug with a link to this thread, and summarise the consensus if/when
one is reach
On 2009-04-17, Francesco Poli wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Apr 2009 23:09:57 +0200 Florian Weimer wrote:
>
>> * Olly Betts:
>>
>> > To summarise, php5-xapian wraps the GPLv2+ licensed Xapian library for
>> > PHP v3.01 licensed PHP5.
>>
>> The PHP license is fine if you use Xapian under the GPLv3.
>
> The F
On Fri, 17 Apr 2009 23:09:57 +0200 Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Olly Betts:
>
> > To summarise, php5-xapian wraps the GPLv2+ licensed Xapian library for
> > PHP v3.01 licensed PHP5.
>
> The PHP license is fine if you use Xapian under the GPLv3.
The FSF seems to disagree: quoting from
http://www.gn
* Olly Betts:
> To summarise, php5-xapian wraps the GPLv2+ licensed Xapian library for
> PHP v3.01 licensed PHP5.
The PHP license is fine if you use Xapian under the GPLv3. The
remaining problem is the Zend license, which contains an advertizing
clause. For historical/political reasons, the FSF
On Fri, 17 Apr 2009, Anthony W. Youngman wrote:
> >I was under the impression that the FSF thinks that if it's illegal to
> >link a program with GPL software and distribute that, it's also illegal if
> >you
> >just distribute the other program and have the user do the link.
> HOW? I hope the FSF d
Hello,
I'm with BCI Staffing. I wanted to do a bit of networking and stay on your
radar for any temporary or contract staffing needs that may present themselves.
In today's fiscally conservative times, temporary employees can often be a
cost effective solution to meeting the demands of your b
In message ,
Ken Arromdee writes
On Fri, 17 Apr 2009, MJ Ray wrote:
http://trac.xapian.org/ticket/191 makes me think the combination only
happens at compile time, so including unused source would be OK.
I was under the impression that the FSF thinks that if it's illegal to
link a program with
On Fri, 17 Apr 2009, MJ Ray wrote:
> http://trac.xapian.org/ticket/191 makes me think the combination only
> happens at compile time, so including unused source would be OK.
I was under the impression that the FSF thinks that if it's illegal to
link a program with GPL software and distribute that,
Olly Betts wrote:
> For reference, this is #513796 in the BTS.
Will you summarise/link or should we cc?
[...]
> Steve Langasek:
>
> There are several other PHP extensions in circulation that use GPLed
> libraries, some of them distributed with the PHP source itself. (The
> readline
Hi.
I have the following license related doubt:
There is a upstream code with GPL license, that link dynamically with
libsnmp (http://www.net-snmp.org/).
Libsnmp can be compiled with or without openssl support. The upstream
code don't use the parts of libsnmp that supports encryption and needs
op
11 matches
Mail list logo
