On Thursday 23 May 2002 4:03 am, Rod Dixon wrote:
Please take a moment or two to download a draft of the framework for our
work on the OSD. We have only posted Article 1. We would like to hear
your thoughts on the framework. It is our view that a model code is the
most helpful framework for
On Monday 06 May 2002 8:12 am, Ken Brown wrote:
Hello,
Does anyone know approximately how many lines of code are in Unix and
Linux?
Have a look at http://www.dwheeler.com/sloc/
--
Philip Hunt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I would guess that he really believes whatever is politically
advantageous
On Tuesday 19 March 2002 3:48 pm, Ean Schuessler wrote:
On Mon, 2002-03-18 at 18:01, phil hunt wrote:
This ties it to a specific technology. For all anyone knows, no-one
will be using http in 109 years time.
Once HTTP goes away (which will probably be 109 years)
OK, I meant 10 years
On Monday 18 March 2002 5:14 pm, Ean Schuessler wrote:
What if you simply added a requirement that:
http://[service host name]:80/gnu-sources
Must always either supply the sources or a redirect to the sources?
This ties it to a specific technology. For all anyone knows, no-one
will be
On Tuesday 12 March 2002 8:14 pm, Andy Tai wrote:
The only point in this license seems to be the GPL
incompatibility. And you then blame the GPL? If the
GPL is guilty of anything, then you are guilty of
the same.
So this license creates walls in open source code
and divides the
On Wednesday 13 March 2002 1:55 pm, Colin Percival wrote:
At 14:04 13/03/2002 +, phil hunt wrote:
I agree. The entire intent behind this license is to be
deliberately incompatible with the most commonly used open
source license.
No, it isn't. The intent is to ensure that a free
On Wednesday 13 March 2002 7:55 pm, Colin Percival wrote:
To save time, can we just agree that I have absolutely
horrible motives, that I'm a Microsoft plant, and that I'm
reporting to the Illuminati, and get back to discussing the
license?
You are not interested in defending your motives;
On Tuesday 12 March 2002 4:07 am, Andy Tai wrote:
While this license probably is open source,
My reading of the license and the OSD suggests to me that it
isn't.
OSD, para 1: The license shall not restrict any party from
selling or giving away the software [...]
License, 3 (c): The
On Tuesday 12 March 2002 1:16 am, Colin Percival wrote:
At 11 Mar 2002 20:57:24 -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] resent my email to this
mailing list and added the line:
[ Please discuss this license. Is he reinventing the LGPL? ]
No, I'm not.
To start with, the LGPL only applies to
On Tuesday 12 March 2002 3:53 pm, Colin Percival wrote:
At 15:37 12/03/2002 +, phil hunt wrote:
OSD, para 1: The license shall not restrict any party from
selling or giving away the software [...]
License, 3 (c): The license under which the derivative work
is distributed must
On Wednesday 06 March 2002 9:59 pm, dave sag wrote:
The intent of clause 4 is that people are encouraged to think about
and to describe their work as being pronoic, ie as being part of a
greater conspiracy to make life better. we encourage developers do
this before, or if ever, seeking
On Monday 21 January 2002 12:07 pm, Patrik Wallstrom wrote:
I know this has been up for discussion before, but I didn't really
follow the thread, and I want to know some extra things.
Is there any current open source licenses that can enforce the software
to follow an exact algorithm (as
On Friday 30 November 2001 4:23 am, J C Lawrence wrote:
On Thu, 29 Nov 2001 17:10:42 -0800 (PST)
Andy Tai [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Given the history of Free Software and Open Source (that Open
Source is a marketing name (Bruce Perens) or marketing program
(Eric Raymond) for Free
On Sunday 28 October 2001 10:43 pm, Karsten M. Self wrote:
What can be done more to this effect?
The Open Source trademark was not certified.
Have you contacted the company?
If this has not already been done, I'd suggest a *polite* note
sent to them pointing out their error and suggesting
On Saturday 22 September 2001 11:39 pm, Karsten M. Self wrote:
Yet Another Public License (YAPL) is a bad trend.
Ceterus paribus, more licenses are bad. As the number of licenses
increases, the disruption caused by an additional license
increases.
This is because interaction effects of
On Wednesday 08 August 2001 2:15 am, David Johnson wrote:
My point is not whether a thing can be done, but whether it should
be done at all. I don't believe that Open Source licenses should
regulate in any way the actual execution of the software.
Are you saying that the Open Source
Consider this situation:
Alice writes a program, aprog, which she licenses under the GPL.
Bob writes another program, which invokes the aprog executable,
using the POSIX system() call. Does Bob's program have to be
released under a GPL-compatible license?
(Assume for the sake of argument
On Thursday 21 June 2001 12:58 am, Henningsen wrote:
Currently that is the rule no doubt, but I think we could get open
source code written faster and probably better if people could
actually expect getting paid for their work. In exchange for giving
up his/her copyrights, a contributor to my
On Wednesday 23 May 2001 8:40 pm, Ravicher, Daniel B. wrote:
Michael,
The clause only says which law applies, it doesn't limit where cases can be
held. It is not uncommon for courts in , say California, to decide a case
under New York law. Lastly, the enforceability of such governing law
.
Similarly the LGPL and MPL are both weak copyleft licenses, with
[blah blah blah]... you get the idea.
--
* Phil Hunt *
On Sun, 22 Apr 2001, Angelo Schneider wrote:
phil hunt wrote:
On Fri, 20 Apr 2001, Angelo Schneider wrote:
Hi!
In Europe APIs are not copyright able.
No idea about the US.
However if you publich them in a book, the book of course is
copyrighted.
However you can
).
--
* Phil Hunt *
An unforseen issue has arisen with your computer. Don't worry your silly
little head about what has gone wrong; here's a pretty animation of a
paperclip to look at instead.
-- Windows2007 error message
e for data formats. (In Europe dataformats e.g. a flat file
format for a word processor are not copyright able)
This will change under the new EU copyright law, where it will be illegal
to decrypt any encrypted file format (e.g. DVD) without the copyright
holder's permission.
--
*
On Wed, 18 Apr 2001, Brian Behlendorf wrote:
On Wed, 18 Apr 2001, phil hunt wrote:
I'm not familiar with Perl, so I'll attempt to translate this into C
for clarification.
OK.
I create a library in C. The interface is defined in mylibrary.h.
For someone to use my library, they must
cases I could see (if I have understood you
correctly), the restriction could be a way of preventing a fork of the
code. IMO, the ability to fork is a necessary part of an open source
license.
--
* Phil Hunt *
"An unforseen issue has arisen with your computer. Don't worry your silly
ould Apple mind them not disclosing it?
--
* Phil Hunt *
"An unforseen issue has arisen with your computer. Don't worry your silly
little head about what has gone wrong; here's a pretty animation of a
paperclip to look at instead."
-- Windows2007 error message
be an exception, but it does meet the
definition in letter and spirit.
According to http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html
the new ("Clarified") version of the Artistic License is Free Software.
--
* Phil Hunt *
"An unforseen issue has arisen with your comput
On Thu, 5 Apr 2001, Nick Moffitt wrote:
begin phil hunt quotation:
Two question that spring to mind:
If someone is using internally a modification of APSL software, why
would they want to not disclose it?
Assuming that this question was not *purely* rhetorical:
Not at all
being used for commercial or non commercial purposes.
--
* Phil Hunt *
"An unforseen issue has arisen with your computer. Don't worry your silly
little head about what has gone wrong; here's a pretty animation of a
paperclip to look at instead."
-- Windows2007 error message
ndle it up with
a trivial "hello world" program.
--
* Phil Hunt *
"An unforseen issue has arisen with your computer. Don't worry your silly
little head about what has gone wrong; here's a pretty animation of a
paperclip to look at instead."
-- Windows2007 error message
n* copying? If so, does this mean
that if someone illegally encapsulates my GPL'd code then they can still
legally run my program?
--
* Phil Hunt *
"An unforseen issue has arisen with your computer. Don't worry your silly
little head about what has gone wrong; here's a pretty animation
On Wed, 28 Mar 2001, Eric Jacobs wrote:
Plainly, this is not what #7 means.
OK, what does #7 mean?
--
* Phil Hunt *
"An unforseen issue has arisen with your computer. Don't worry your silly
little head about what has gone wrong; here's a pretty animation of a
paperclip to
?
--
* Phil Hunt *
"An unforseen issue has arisen with your computer. Don't worry your silly
little head about what has gone wrong; here's a pretty animation of a
paperclip to look at instead."
-- Windows2007 error message
difficult for me to give sound advice to my
clients, and makes licensing rights in or out under the GNU GPL very risky.
What particular problems do you have with the GPL? IMO it is quite clearly
written, as licenses go.
I also think the Mozilla license is quite clear.
--
* Phil Hunt
e.g. GPL'd) after a time delay, would be one
I would approve of -- I'd be happy to buy software under that license.
--
* Phil Hunt *
"An unforseen issue has arisen with your computer. Don't worry your silly
little head about what has gone wrong; here's a pretty animation of a
pa
agraphs? That sounds
a good idea.
--
* Phil Hunt *
"An unforseen issue has arisen with your computer. Don't worry your silly
little head about what has gone wrong; here's a pretty animation of a
paperclip to look at instead."
-- Windows2007 error message
am not desiring a copyleft license for this
project. Unfortunately, the Open Gaming License will only approve copylefted
licenses and games. In other words, I can release a public domain game and
they would refuse to call it free and open.
That seems bizarre to me.
--
* Phil Hunt
ested this
to RMS; he replied that legal difficulties prevented this.
--
* Phil Hunt *
"An unforseen issue has arisen with your computer. Don't worry your silly
little head about what has gone wrong; here's a pretty animation of a
paperclip to look at instead."
-- Windows2007 error message
38 matches
Mail list logo
