On Thu, Jul 17, 2003 at 04:35:45PM +, Brian M. Carlson wrote:
On Thu, Jul 17, 2003 at 11:45:39AM +0200, Matt Kraai wrote:
Would the the descriptions be correct if the following patch was
applied?
*** packages.wml.~1.52.~Tue Jul 8 17:25:45 2003
--- packages.wmlThu Jul 17
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 06:46:15PM +, Brian M. Carlson wrote:
Patented software does not have to be patent-encumbered (for example, we
have many programs and libraries in both main and non-US/main that use
CAST5 [0], which is patented). Patent-encumbered software would use
things like LZW,
On Thu, Jul 17, 2003 at 11:45:39AM +0200, Matt Kraai wrote:
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 06:46:15PM +, Brian M. Carlson wrote:
Patented software does not have to be patent-encumbered (for example, we
have many programs and libraries in both main and non-US/main that use
CAST5 [0], which is
On Mon, Jul 14, 2003 at 11:42:09PM +0200, Matt Kraai wrote:
On Mon, Jul 14, 2003 at 09:15:01PM +, Brian M. Carlson wrote:
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 09:59:34PM -0700, Matt Kraai wrote:
The thread
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2002/debian-legal-200207/msg00029.html
On Tue, Jul 15, 2003 at 09:16:30AM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Mon, Jul 14, 2003 at 11:42:09PM +0200, Matt Kraai wrote:
On Mon, Jul 14, 2003 at 09:15:01PM +, Brian M. Carlson wrote:
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 09:59:34PM -0700, Matt Kraai wrote:
-dtemNon-US/Main/em and
On Mon, Jul 14, 2003 at 09:15:01PM +, Brian M. Carlson wrote:
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 09:59:34PM -0700, Matt Kraai wrote:
The thread
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2002/debian-legal-200207/msg00029.html
documents the exact rationale for these sections. The following
On Mon, Jul 14, 2003 at 11:42:09PM +0200, Matt Kraai wrote:
On Mon, Jul 14, 2003 at 09:15:01PM +, Brian M. Carlson wrote:
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 09:59:34PM -0700, Matt Kraai wrote:
The thread
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2002/debian-legal-200207/msg00029.html
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 09:59:34PM -0700, Matt Kraai wrote:
On Tue, Jul 08, 2003 at 02:24:25PM +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
The packages page at http://www.debian.org/distrib/packages
currently says:
=
Non-US/Main and Non-US/Non-Free
These packages cannot be exported from the
On Tue, Jul 08, 2003 at 06:15:35AM -0700, Matt Kraai wrote:
On Tue, Jul 08, 2003 at 03:01:17AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 09:59:34PM -0700, Matt Kraai wrote:
Index: english/distrib/packages.wml
===
On Tue, Jul 08, 2003 at 02:24:25PM +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
The packages page at http://www.debian.org/distrib/packages
currently says:
=
Non-US/Main and Non-US/Non-Free
These packages cannot be exported from the USA, they are mostly
encryption software packages, or software that
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 09:59:34PM -0700, Matt Kraai wrote:
The thread
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2002/debian-legal-200207/msg00029.html
documents the exact rationale for these sections. The following
patch incorporates its conclusions into the packages page.
I'd appreciate
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 09:59:34PM -0700, Matt Kraai wrote:
The thread
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2002/debian-legal-200207/msg00029.html
documents the exact rationale for these sections. The following
patch incorporates its conclusions into the packages page.
I'd appreciate
On Tue, Jul 08, 2003 at 03:01:17AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 09:59:34PM -0700, Matt Kraai wrote:
Index: english/distrib/packages.wml
===
RCS file: /cvs/webwml/webwml/english/distrib/packages.wml,v
On Tue, Jul 08, 2003 at 06:15:35AM -0700, Matt Kraai wrote:
On Tue, Jul 08, 2003 at 03:01:17AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
[snip]
s/encryption software packages/ that are not exempted from the export
control procedure that is used for packages in Main/
I find this last change
14 matches
Mail list logo
