On 13102 March 1977, Christoph Egger wrote:
When I encounter a work under CC BY 2.0, I have a hard time explaining
Upstream
why it is strictly necessary to upgrade it to 2.5 or more for their work to
be
distributed in Debian. What are the crucial changes that made CC BY 2.5
Free
while
On 01/25/2013 10:41, Charles Plessy wrote:
Le Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 10:16:24AM +0100, Joerg Jaspert a écrit :
On 13102 March 1977, Christoph Egger wrote:
Alternatively, if we can not find a significant difference of freedom
between
CC BY 2.5, and CC BY 2.0, how about accepting CC BY 2.0 in
Le Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 01:19:23PM +0100, Ansgar Burchardt a écrit :
On 01/25/2013 10:41, Charles Plessy wrote:
Le Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 10:16:24AM +0100, Joerg Jaspert a écrit :
On 13102 March 1977, Christoph Egger wrote:
Alternatively, if we can not find a significant difference of freedom
Hi,
Am 25.01.13 15:07, schrieb Charles Plessy:
There are also moin, netcdf-java, vlc, or wxmaxima, which either have an
inaccurate copyright file or contain files licensed under CC-BY-(SA-)2.5
(and pinta with by-nc-nd-2.5).
Note that I have not tried to be exhaustive in my search.
I have to
Charles Plessy ple...@debian.org writes:
Le Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 01:19:23PM +0100, Ansgar Burchardt a écrit :
On 01/25/2013 10:41, Charles Plessy wrote:
Le Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 10:16:24AM +0100, Joerg Jaspert a écrit :
On 13102 March 1977, Christoph Egger wrote:
Alternatively, if we can
5 matches
Mail list logo