Florian Weimer writes:
This is probably correct, but it is completely irrelevant in our case.
Some parts of Python 2.1 are still covered by the GPL-incompatible
CNRI license, so Python 2.1 as a whole is not GPL compatible.
which parts exactly?
Matthias Klose [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Florian Weimer writes:
This is probably correct, but it is completely irrelevant in our case.
Some parts of Python 2.1 are still covered by the GPL-incompatible
CNRI license, so Python 2.1 as a whole is not GPL compatible.
which parts exactly?
On Thu, May 24, 2001 at 01:02:29PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
Gregor Hoffleit [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I talked to RMS, Eben Moglen and GvR. The bad news: According to RMS+Moglen,
the license used in Python 2.1 still is not yet compatible with the GPL. The
good news: The PSF decided to
Hi Moshe,
I'm trying to lay out a schedule for the Debian Python packages in woody. My
plan would also depend on the release date of Python 2.0.1. Thomas Wouters
wrote: Another couple of weeks at least, before a release candidate. It
also depends on Moshe; if he actually releases 2.0.1 anytime
I have uploaded experimental Python 2.1 packages. Grab them at
http://people.debian.org/~flight/python2/
The packages are completely untested. I had to re-implement the building of
the shared library (just finished), the remainder of the packages is mostly
unchanged.
In a few hours, I will
Gregor Hoffleit writes:
I have uploaded experimental Python 2.1 packages. Grab them at
http://people.debian.org/~flight/python2/
thanks!
Now the problems start if neither 2.0.1 nor 2.1.1 would be ready in time. If
it's obious early that the won't be ready in time, we could start
6 matches
Mail list logo
