On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 14:20:45 +0200 anatoly techtonik wrote:
Hello,
Hello...
Following recent Python policy updates I wonder if GPL is really the
license of choice for software documentation in Debian?
IMHO, yes it is and it should be, really!
The GPL is the best choice, whenever a
On Dec 15, 2009, at 10:20 AM, Matthew Johnson wrote:
Clause c and the fact that the author may have claims to the JUMBO name
under trademark law means he can certainly require a name change. I
don't think he can stop you from claiming that you can read and write
his format, however. A
On Thu Dec 17 00:06, Andrew Dalke wrote:
The feedback here has helped. The CML maintainers are going to split
off the CC-BY-ND into another file which can go into non-free, the
rest of the JUMBO code will clarified to be Apache 2.0, the CML
developers are going through all their code to check
On Dec 17, 2009, at 12:19 AM, Matthew Johnson wrote:
I assume, then, that it can function without that non-free file?
Yes. Either it provides validation capabilities they don't need, or they have
some hand-written code to deal with the parts that were automated because of
having the schema
In message 20091216233823.af491478@firenze.linux.it, Francesco
Poli f...@firenze.linux.it writes
The second question may seem strange, but why copyleft license is
used?
Hopefully in order to prevent the distribution of proprietary
derivative works...
CLOSED derivative works.
If it's
On Dec 17, 2009, at 2:00 AM, Anthony W. Youngman wrote:
CLOSED derivative works.
If it's copyright, it's proprietary.
proprietary == property. If it's copyright, it has an owner, therefore
it's property, therefore it's proprietary.
Although the GNU project disagrees again with your
Andrew Dalke wrote:
On Dec 14, 2009, at 9:16 PM, Anthony W. Youngman wrote:
I can't be bothered to read the book, but if it's the book I think it is,
then I already have read it and came to the conclusion that the author was
blind.
[...]
Read it for yourself, make sure you've got a copy
On Dec 17, 2009, at 3:41 AM, MJ Ray wrote:
This part followed if it's the book I think it is, then I already
have read it. Maybe the contradictions aren't in the part of the
book linked, but elsewhere in the book read.
Indeed. BTW, I should have interpreted the original phrase as read
the
8 matches
Mail list logo