ed.
--
:-( This Universe is buggy! Where's the Creator's BTS? ;-)
......
Francesco Poli GnuPG Key ID = DD6DFCF4
Key fingerprint = C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
pgpIsXIM9Jgh4.pgp
Description: PGP signature
ould say...
--
:-( This Universe is buggy! Where's the Creator's BTS? ;-)
......
Francesco Poli GnuPG Key ID = DD6DFCF4
Key fingerprint = C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
pgpjIOxAuFeE5.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 08:44:08 -0700 Josh Triplett wrote:
> Francesco Poli wrote:
[...]
> > * "the acceptability of software and other content"
> >
> > Content? Which "other content" does Debian distribute besides
> > software? If, by "software&qu
rd-playing, we can still talk, despite
differences in terminology.
What's important is to keep in mind that we (Debian) think that the same
freedoms are valuable for programs and non-programs.
--
:-( This Universe is buggy! Where's the Creator's BTS? ;-)
..
publicly display, publicly perform or publicly digitally
| perform the Work for the same recipient without those measures.
>
> Otherwise, I think we're doing well. Thanks to everyone who's
> commented.
You're welcome. :)
--
:-( This Universe is buggy! Where&#x
Universe is buggy! Where's the Creator's BTS? ;-)
......
Francesco Poli GnuPG Key ID = DD6DFCF4
Key fingerprint = C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
pgpFI9MzWgODO.pgp
Description: PGP signature
ux kernel image through a mirror network or
similar.
Redistributing is very different from transferring a copy.
You make copies while you redistribute.
--
:-( This Universe is buggy! Where's the Creator's BTS? ;-)
.
to
reply, in most cases...).:-(
So far, no luck.
Does anyone know the answer?
--
:-( This Universe is buggy! Where's the Creator's BTS? ;-)
......
Francesco Poli GnuPG Key ID =
.
Is this right? Is my MUA misbehaving as it seems it builds threads
without taking "Resent-Message-ID:" fields into account (i.e.: only
looking at "Message-ID:" values)?
--
:-( This Universe is buggy! Where's the Creator's BTS? ;-)
w is full
of...
IANAL, anyway.
--
:-( This Universe is buggy! Where's the Creator's BTS? ;-)
..
Francesco Poli GnuPG Key ID = DD6DFCF4
Key fingerprint = C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
pgpBDHMporw6l.pgp
Description: PGP signature
gy! Where's the Creator's BTS? ;-)
..
Francesco Poli GnuPG Key ID = DD6DFCF4
Key fingerprint = C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
pgpG9c1uHEGtw.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 22:43:20 -0400 Raul Miller wrote:
[...]
> On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 12:21:40AM +0200, Francesco Poli wrote:
[...]
> > In Italian author's right law ("legge sul diritto d'autore"), there
> > is no use of or definition for the term "de
sed?
--
:-( This Universe is buggy! Where's the Creator's BTS? ;-)
......
Francesco Poli GnuPG Key ID = DD6DFCF4
Key fingerprint = C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
pgpj9shROvd0r.pgp
Description: PGP signature
ll.
--
:-( This Universe is buggy! Where's the Creator's BTS? ;-)
..
Francesco Poli GnuPG Key ID = DD6DFCF4
Key fingerprint = C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
pgp3CVxl318lI.pgp
Description: PGP signature
t; protecting the authors' own opinions.
[Comment] Good example. My favorite one is the following: if the license
of a MUA forbade to add HTML mail support (because the authors are
philosophically against HTML mail), this license would be considered
non-free, even when it would be protecting t
On Thu, 14 Apr 2005 10:15:25 +0200 Jacobo Tarrio wrote:
> O Xoves, 14 de Abril de 2005 ás 01:22:56 +0200, Francesco Poli
> escribía:
>
> > > A: The DFSG is a set of minimum criteria that are taken into
> > > account when
> > > deciding if a particular cop
eator's BTS? ;-)
......
Francesco Poli GnuPG Key ID = DD6DFCF4
Key fingerprint = C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
pgpVSaHo20DqG.pgp
Description: PGP signature
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/info/BSD_2Clause.html
3-clause BSD license http://www.gnu.org/licenses/info/BSD_3Clause.html
--
:-( This Universe is buggy! Where's the Creator's BTS? ;-)
......
Francesco Poli
ibute the text of the GPL by itself.
And that's guaranteed! ;-)
--
:-( This Universe is buggy! Where's the Creator's BTS? ;-)
..
Francesco Poli GnuPG Key ID = DD6DFCF4
Key fingerprint = C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
pgpfySJo8ej9a.pgp
Description: PGP signature
t out, various free X11 implementations (XFree86
before version 4.3.99cannotremember, Xorg, ...) are under a mix of
different (but similar) licenses, and not only under the "X11 license"...
--
:-( This Universe is buggy! Where's the Creator's BTS? ;-)
;s interpretation can be trusted, but take into account that
it has not yet been tested in court...) the library, as it is now,
cannot be linked against GPL-incompatible works.
--
:-( This Universe is buggy! Where's the Creator's BTS? ;-)
.
d thing is this insisting on "textual modification".
What if I make a non-textual modification (let's say the Package
includes an image)?
--
:-( This Universe is buggy! Where's the Creator's BTS? ;-)
...
benefit of the doubt; they've lost that privilege.
Agreed.
--
:-( This Universe is buggy! Where's the Creator's BTS? ;-)
......
Francesco Poli GnuPG Key ID = DD6DFCF4
Key fingerprin
" to "OK"!
That's quite a large improvement... ;-)
--
:-( This Universe is buggy! Where's the Creator's BTS? ;-)
......
Francesco Poli GnuPG Key ID = DD6DFCF4
K
n disagreeing with that.
In other words: well said.
--
:-( This Universe is buggy! Where's the Creator's BTS? ;-)
......
Francesco Poli GnuPG Key ID = DD6DFCF4
Key fingerprint = C979 F34B
on't have the input of many developers.
They may provide their input whenever they want to, but we cannot force
them to do so.
If they don't, maybe they do not care enough or they don't feel
competent enough: so they delegate to debian-legal partecipants...
What
]
I read it and it seems quite good.
Well done! :)
--
:-( This Universe is buggy! Where's the Creator's BTS? ;-)
..
Francesco Poli GnuPG Key ID = DD6DFCF4
Key fingerprint = C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
pgp7xbduk4n3R.pgp
Description: PGP signature
y else wants
> to (or indeed to do it with someone else if they do want to). I'll
> even put it on high priority; I think I could get quite a lot done
> very quickly, since the information exists, but just has to be
> integrated.
Great!
This is really appreciated, indeed. :-)
lost to
me... :-(
--
:-( This Universe is buggy! Where's the Creator's BTS? ;-)
..
Francesco Poli GnuPG Key ID = DD6DFCF4
Key fingerprint = C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF
/;
they delegate the /advisory role/.
--
:-( This Universe is buggy! Where's the Creator's BTS? ;-)
..
Francesco Poli GnuPG Key ID = DD6DFCF4
Key fingerprint = C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
pgpsJNDqrWHD4.pgp
Description: PGP signature
ttp://freedoom.sourceforge.net/), but (maybe) they are infringing on
the original Doom game data copyright... :-/
--
:-( This Universe is buggy! Where's the Creator's BTS? ;-)
..
Francesco Poli GnuPG Key
iverse is buggy! Where's the Creator's BTS? ;-)
..
Francesco Poli GnuPG Key ID = DD6DFCF4
Key fingerprint = C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
pgp6gyqLRL6nH.pgp
Description: PGP signature
s the Creator's BTS? ;-)
......
Francesco Poli GnuPG Key ID = DD6DFCF4
Key fingerprint = C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
pgpTKPW52nVr3.pgp
Description: PGP signature
bed.
Done.
I also Cc:ed Alessio Papini, so that you can contact him directly in
private as soon as you like: he kindly accepted to talk with you and
provide some information.
HTH.
Bye! :)
--
:-( This Universe is buggy! Where's the Creator's BTS? ;-)
...
ib Packages
500 http://ftp.sk.debian.org sarge/contrib Packages
--
:-( This Universe is buggy! Where's the Creator's BTS? ;-)
..
Francesco Poli GnuPG Key ID = DD6DFCF4
Key fi
> prohibit it. That's just my personal rationale, as a person not
> expecting to be a political dissident or to become stuck on a desert
> island.)
I'm glad to hear this!
I mainly agree with you.
--
:-( This Universe is buggy! Where's the Creator's BTS? ;-)
..
unmodifiable, because they are not programs!", just with a simple
s/not programs/neither programs, nor documentation/
:-(
This, as you Glenn correctly pointed out, has been discussed to death
before the GR's.
--
:-( This Universe is buggy! Where's the Creator's BT
On Thu, 7 Dec 2006 11:36:18 + (GMT) MJ Ray wrote:
> Francesco Poli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > SIL OPEN FONT LICENSE Version 1.1-review2 - 15 November 2006
> > [...]
[...]
> > > 3) No Modified Version of the Font Software may use the Reserved
>
t keep being
published by the FSF?!? The GPLv3draft1was followed by a reasonable
consultation period, but then the GPLv3draft2, accompanied by the
LGPLv3draft1, was shortly followed by GFDLv2draft1, and by
GSFDLv1draft1; now this GNU Wiki License seems to be in preparation...
This tsunami of new license
ombined documents,
Style: documents?
We were talking about works in general, not documents. I think that
here the word "documents" is misleading.
> taken together.
[...]
> 7. AGGREGATION WITH INDEPENDENT WORKS
>
> A compilation of the Work or its derivatives with other separa
On Fri, 8 Dec 2006 10:11:11 + (GMT) MJ Ray wrote:
> Francesco Poli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> > Is this kind of /cumulative/ name-change requirement allowed by
> > DFSG#4?
>
> We need copyright permission for each contributing work, so I can't
> s
On Fri, 08 Dec 2006 08:02:55 +0800 Gervase Markham wrote:
> Francesco Poli wrote:
[...]
> > Actually, DFSG#4 states, in part:
> >
> > | The license may require derived works to carry a different name or
> > | version number from the original software.
> >
>
On Fri, 8 Dec 2006 22:47:32 + (GMT) MJ Ray wrote:
> Francesco Poli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > What follows is my own analysis of the first draft of GNU FDL v2.
> > I welcome any comments on my reasoning.
>
> As you might expect from
> my summary http://m
On Mon, 11 Dec 2006 10:28:13 + (GMT) MJ Ray wrote:
> Francesco Poli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Fri, 8 Dec 2006 22:47:32 + (GMT) MJ Ray wrote:
> > > I don't think it matters. Pseudonymous publication seems
> > > possible, but we m
On Mon, 11 Dec 2006 16:21:19 + Gervase Markham wrote:
> Francesco Poli wrote:
> > I probably missed where the license makes sure that Reserved Font
> > Names can only become such by being names used in some ancestor
> > version of the Font Software.
> >
> &g
On Tue, 12 Dec 2006 10:38:35 + (GMT) MJ Ray wrote:
> Francesco Poli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...]
[...]
> > So, how come the LGPL is considered a copyleft license?
> > Or even the GFDLv2draft1, for that matter: it includes one or
> > two relicensing clause(s).
On Tue, 12 Dec 2006 10:32:24 + (GMT) MJ Ray wrote:
> Francesco Poli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The clarification from MJ Ray regarding DFSG#4 made me think that
> > each distinct copyright holder had a veto power on _one_ Font Name.
> > At least I hoped it was
On Wed, 13 Dec 2006 09:22:22 + (GMT) MJ Ray wrote:
> Francesco Poli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > "Allows non-free derivs" ?
>
> That's probably accurate too, yes.
OK, I'm going to use that tagline for my comments (as soon as I submit
them to the
On Wed, 13 Dec 2006 09:21:21 + (GMT) MJ Ray wrote:
> Francesco Poli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Forbidding reuse of a the name of the original software is OK,
> > forbidding an arbitrary name is not.
> > Don't you agree with me that this goes beyond
On Thu, 14 Dec 2006 12:18:35 +1100 Ben Finney wrote:
> Francesco Poli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Wed, 13 Dec 2006 09:22:22 + (GMT) MJ Ray wrote:
> >
> > > Francesco Poli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > "Allows non-free
On Fri, 15 Dec 2006 09:38:07 + Gervase Markham wrote:
> Francesco Poli wrote:
> > The clarification from MJ Ray regarding DFSG#4 made me think that
> > each distinct copyright holder had a veto power on _one_ Font Name.
> > At least I hoped it was so, since if each
On Thu, 14 Dec 2006 23:42:05 + (GMT) MJ Ray wrote:
> Francesco Poli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > On Wed, 13 Dec 2006 09:22:22 + (GMT) MJ Ray wrote:
> > > Francesco Poli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > "Allows non-free derivs" ?
> > &
On Sat, 16 Dec 2006 11:33:53 +1100 Ben Finney wrote:
> Francesco Poli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Thu, 14 Dec 2006 12:18:35 +1100 Ben Finney wrote:
> > > I recommend the more precise:
> > >"Allows redistribution under non-free terms"
&g
and Kees Jan
> Koster.
Many thanks to the people who helped in getting this relicensing done!
It's appreciated, indeed.
--
But it is also tradition that times *must* and always
do change, my friend. -- from _Coming to America_
..... Francesco P
this Agreement.
3. Dispute Resolution
If a dispute arises concerning this Agreement, the
parties shall attempt to resolve the matter by
negotiation.
--
Last updated: 2006-05-02
--
But it is also tradition t
On Wed, 20 Dec 2006 19:43:57 -0500 Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> Gervase Markham wrote:
>
> > Francesco Poli wrote:
[...]
> >> This means that forbidding derived works to carry the same name as
> >> the original software is acceptable.
> >> I believe that for
tion that times *must* and always
do change, my friend. -- from _Coming to America_
..... Francesco Poli .
GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
pgp7wd6gzK0CW.pgp
Description: PGP signature
dations can be
found at the end of the GPLv2 text).
--
But it is also tradition that times *must* and always
do change, my friend. -- from _Coming to America_
. Francesco Poli .
GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
pgpXoMWzc2jBm.pgp
Description: PGP signature
thers agree, I think you should file a serious bug against the
gnuplot package ASAP.
--
But it is also tradition that times *must* and always
do change, my friend. -- from _Coming to America_
. Francesco Poli .
GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
pgphxS3cM4qUO.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Thu, 21 Dec 2006 16:41:27 -0800 Ben Pfaff wrote:
> Francesco Poli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Thu, 21 Dec 2006 11:53:25 -0600 Jordi Gutierrez Hermoso wrote:
> >
> >> The readme.txt file states
> >>
> >> This program is released
On Sat, 23 Dec 2006 20:43:40 +0100 Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 08, 2006 at 05:36:05PM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote:
[...]
> > Improvable: still suboptimal definition of "Transparent" copy
>
> > The definition of "Transparent" copy is impr
On Fri, 29 Dec 2006 12:06:04 +0100 Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 23, 2006 at 11:08:26PM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote:
>
> > P.S.: Please do not reply to me and the list, as I didn't ask to be
> > copied.
>
> Yeah, sorry about that;
Don't worry.
>
om _Coming to America_
..... Francesco Poli .
GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
pgpVAPXTBj7Yy.pgp
Description: PGP signature
er details.
--
http://frx.netsons.org/progs/scripts/releas-o-meter.html
Try our amazing Releas-o-meter!
. Francesco Poli .
GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
pgphSyxbZ5BlT.pgp
Description: PGP signature
ds, in part:
| If the Program does not specify a version number of this License, you
| may choose any version ever published by the Free Software Foundation.
--
http://frx.netsons.org/progs/scripts/releas-o-meter.html
Try our amazing Releas-o-meter!
.
On Mon, 08 Jan 2007 21:02:02 -0800 Jeff Carr wrote:
> On 01/05/07 16:43, Francesco Poli wrote:
[...]
> > Mmmmh, I'm not convinced about the DFSG-freeness of
> > CC-by-sa-2.5/scotland either...
>
> That's good, I'm not convinced that CC in any form isn&#
;t
yet received it back and the archives don't show it yet).
--
http://frx.netsons.org/progs/scripts/releas-o-meter.html
Try our amazing Releas-o-meter!
. Francesco Poli .
GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
pgpzkopAmx2iC.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Tue, 9 Jan 2007 20:14:05 -0500 Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 10, 2007 at 01:34:53AM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote:
> >
> > Hence, I don't know what the lawyers are looking for, but a license
> > that grants too few permissions is not OK to me, even if i
On Wed, 10 Jan 2007 09:08:48 -0600 Terry Hancock wrote:
> Francesco Poli wrote:
> >>The CC lawyers are trying to draft a generic, useful and good
> >license.
> >
> > Useful to *whom*?
> > Useful to end users and to the community (and hence to the society)?
On Wed, 10 Jan 2007 18:44:50 -0800 Jeff Carr wrote:
> On 01/09/07 16:34, Francesco Poli wrote:
>
> > Drafting and actively promoting licenses that forbid commercial use
> > and/or modifications harms the free software movement, rather than
> > helping it.
>
> That
so. And CC is doing nothing to
discourage this, AFAIK.
[...]
> I hope the above is a bit clearer?
Only a bit, not much, unfortunately... :(
--
http://frx.netsons.org/progs/scripts/releas-o-meter.html
Try our amazing Releas-o-meter!
..... Fr
ter.html
Try our amazing Releas-o-meter!
..... Francesco Poli .
GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
pgp66l43yNH2O.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 22:07:30 -0800 Jeff Carr wrote:
> On 01/12/07 09:27, Francesco Poli wrote:
>
> >> Even though the existence of an optional clause (like NC) appears
> >> to contradict the DFSG in situations we can imagine, that does not
> >> rule out it'
On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 21:53:50 -0800 Jeff Carr wrote:
> On 01/11/07 12:27, Francesco Poli wrote:
>
> > You seem to be happy with free programs whose documentation is
> > non-free.
>
> Well now, I'm not like that. It's not up to me if the authors choose a
>
On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 21:42:49 -0800 Jeff Carr wrote:
> On 01/09/07 09:16, Francesco Poli wrote:
>
> > Please do _not_ reply to my personal e-mail address, while Cc:ing
> > the list address, as I didn't ask you to do so.
> > Please follow the code of cond
On Thu, 11 Jan 2007 08:42:22 -0600 Terry Hancock wrote:
> Francesco Poli wrote:
> > On Wed, 10 Jan 2007 09:08:48 -0600 Terry Hancock wrote:
> >
> > Is this a good reason to avoid promoting such freedoms among
> > creators?
>
> That's a "strawman argume
ot seen the code
under discussion.
--
http://frx.netsons.org/progs/scripts/releas-o-meter.html
Try our amazing Releas-o-meter!
. Francesco Poli .
GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
pgpwpdBo0iIXn.pgp
Description: PGP signature
/progs/scripts/refresh-pubring.html
Need to refresh your keyring in a piecewise fashion?
. Francesco Poli .
GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
pgpfQjfLITK6x.pgp
Description: PGP signature
ons): I don't know whether the Debian Project can
actually do better than this and *still* retain some sort of official
logo...
BTW, what happened to the non-free font concerns that were expressed by
Branden Robinson in the above-mentioned wiki page?
--
http://frx.netsons.org/progs/scr
se instead. On the other hand, if
upstream really meant to license under CC-by-2.5, then the work is
non-free and the work cannot enter Debian, unless relicensed in a
DFSG-free manner.
--
http://frx.netsons.org/progs/scripts/refresh-pubring.html
Need to refresh your keyring in a piecewise fash
On Wed, 6 Dec 2006 00:43:16 +0100 Francesco Poli wrote:
[...]
> this thread started with a clarification request to
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, where I Cc:ed debian-legal, just to notify that
> the question has been asked to the FSF and that a public response from
> them was desired.
On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 17:25:49 -0800 Jeff Carr wrote:
> On 02/14/07 13:07, Francesco Poli wrote:
>
> > I'm going to file a (normal severity) bug against the bootcd package
> > to request that the license statement is clarified.
>
> It would be a good idea to put tog
On Thu, 15 Feb 2007 09:16:48 +0100 Francesco Poli wrote:
> The point is: which version(s) of the GNU GPL?
> This is not clear at all, IMO. And I had confirmation from the FSF
> that the license statement is confusing...
BTW, what follows is the full quotation of the response I had fro
On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 22:07:07 +0100 Francesco Poli wrote:
>
> I'm going to file a (normal severity) bug against the bootcd package
> to request that the license statement is clarified.
Bug filed: it's #411193, for the record.
See http://bugs.debian.org/411193 for
http://frx.netsons.org/progs/scripts/refresh-pubring.html
Need to refresh your keyring in a piecewise fashion?
..... Francesco Poli .
GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
pgpVGkWD47fxH.pgp
Description: PGP signature
wise fashion?
..... Francesco Poli .
GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
pgpiYpAbnVtd8.pgp
Description: PGP signature
FSG-free game data is found and packaged for main.
--
http://frx.netsons.org/progs/scripts/refresh-pubring.html
Need to refresh your keyring in a piecewise fashion?
..... Francesco Poli .
GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC1
uot; that should not be there,
since this is the CC-by-sa license:
| (g) "License Elements" means the following high-level license
| attributes as selected by Licensor and indicated in the title
| of this License: Attribution, Noncommercial, ShareAlike.
On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 08:05:22 +1100 Andrew Donnellan wrote:
> On 2/26/07, Francesco Poli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi all!
> >
> > In a recent message[1] to the cc-licenses list, a new draft of
> > CC-v3.0 licenses was announced. The message included one docu
ttp://frx.netsons.org/progs/scripts/refresh-pubring.html
Need to refresh your keyring in a piecewise fashion?
..... Francesco Poli .
GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
pgpHxoPF6YEV7.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Sun, 25 Feb 2007 22:51:32 +0100 Francesco Poli wrote:
[...]
> I still have to read the final text (I am not so fast!): hence I don't
> know whether there are differences with respect to the draft I
> analyzed (but I've been told that there are).
OK, I dumped the final text
dopt
> OFL or not.
I see that the full license text has been posted to debian-legal for
review. I'll try to find the time to analyze it soon...
--
http://frx.netsons.org/progs/scripts/refresh-pubring.html
Need to refresh your keyring in a piecewise fashion?
...
On Sun, 25 Feb 2007 17:13:52 -0500 Evan Prodromou wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-25-02 at 19:16 +0100, Francesco Poli wrote:
[...]
> > This is unchanged with respect to the previous drafts: I'm not yet
> > convinced that this clause meets the DFSG.
>
> I disagree, and I think
On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 12:49:43 +0100 Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Francesco Poli:
>
> > Clause 4(a) states, in part:
> >
> > | If You create a Collective Work, upon notice from any
> > | Licensor You must, to the extent practicable, remove from
> > |
On Thu, 1 Mar 2007 09:55:07 + Anthony W. Youngman wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Francesco
> Poli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
> >I think that requiring a credit "at least as prominent as the credits
> >for the other contributing authors"
oth licenses, while distributing
the dual-licensed work?
[...]
--
http://frx.netsons.org/progs/scripts/refresh-pubring.html
Need to refresh your keyring in a piecewise fashion?
. Francesco Poli .
GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
pgp7FEDE9XJMJ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
want to
reach, or otherwise the Free Software pool would get more and more
balkanized...
--
http://frx.netsons.org/progs/scripts/refresh-pubring.html
Need to refresh your keyring in a piecewise fashion?
..... Francesco Poli .
GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B
-legal/2006/04/msg00257.html
[6] http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2006/05/msg3.html
HTH.
--
http://frx.netsons.org/progs/scripts/refresh-pubring.html
Need to refresh your keyring in a piecewise fashion?
. Francesco Poli .
GnuPG key fpr
ted use will be in compliance with Creative Commons'
then-current trademark usage guidelines, as may be published on
its website or otherwise made available upon request from time to
time. For the avoidance of doubt, this trademark restriction does
not form part of the License.
On Tue, 6 Mar 2007 00:32:44 + Andrew Saunders wrote:
> On 3/5/07, Francesco Poli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > As far as CC-v3.0 are concerned, my personal opinion should be clear
> > from the message[2] that you yourself cite: I don't think that any
>
601 - 700 of 1628 matches
Mail list logo
