On Mon, 2007-09-03 at 22:37 +0200, Francesco Poli wrote:
On Mon, 03 Sep 2007 20:56:23 +0200 Soeren Sonnenburg wrote:
[...]
Anyway I below quote both the OSI open source definition and DFSG and
as no one pointed me to any analysis on what could cause
incompatibilities I am now just
On Sat, 2007-09-08 at 15:18 +0200, Francesco Poli wrote:
On Thu, 6 Sep 2007 20:13:56 -0700 Rick Moen wrote:
Quoting Francesco Poli ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
[Comparison of DFSG and OSD:]
OSI based its OSD on the DFSG
More specifically, Bruce Perens wrote
[...]
Yes, that's
On Sun, 2007-09-02 at 21:56 +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
Soeren Sonnenburg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 2007-09-01 at 12:05 +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
The only official statements about DFSG compliance are made by the
ftpmasters.
Well this is not too helpful. I would wish that licenses
Dear all,
the recent discussion about 'Firebird being in main' caused even more
confusion on my side, as the sites [1], [2] (which I consider the
debian-official statement wrt. which license is DFSG compliant) do not
list the MPL as a DFSG conform license but as DFSG-incompatible [1].
Also the
On Sat, 2007-09-01 at 12:05 +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
the recent discussion about 'Firebird being in main' caused even more
confusion on my side, as the sites [1], [2] (which I consider the
debian-official statement wrt. which license is DFSG compliant) do not
list
5 matches
Mail list logo
