Just a note about what @trampster wrote in comment #21: it's not true that in
the free-as-in-freedom software world users do not need to agree to the
licence. The GPL does restrict the single user freedoms in order to grant other
freedoms to the users community at large. For example the GPL
I recently needed to create a debian package for a commercial
application. This application would not be distributed through the
ubuntu software center.
After creating the debian package with the custom licence in the
copyright file I installed the application using by double clicking on
the deb
** Changed in: software-center (Ubuntu)
Status: In Progress = Confirmed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/435183
Title:
Doesn't display information about exact software license
How is it going?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/435183
Title:
Doesn't display information about exact software license
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
** Changed in: software-center (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed = In Progress
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/435183
Title:
Doesn't display information about exact software license
Design in progress:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SoftwarePackageOperations#license
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/435183
Title:
Doesn't display information about exact software license
At least there is nothing that hinders the change to make license
visible for the software that uses only single license. For projects
with multiple it can state like Google Code does - Other Open Source
or a First License, ...
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of
** Changed in: software-center (Ubuntu)
Assignee: (unassigned) = Matthew Paul Thomas (mpt)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/435183
Title:
Doesn't display information about exact
Debian now has a standard for this: http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-
manuals/copyright-format/1.0/
The next step is to specify how the License: fields in a package's
debian/copyright should be aggregated if necessary, and summarized as a
single line of text. For example, License: Open source
** Description changed:
When you see information about software that you want to install, Ubuntu
Software Center says whether the license is Open source,
Proprietary, or Unknown. It does not show more detail than that
(e.g. GPLv2).
It should be helpful not only to make others
** Tags added: db
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/435183
Title:
Doesn't display information about exact software license
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
Has there been any movement on this bug? I have an open question that
directly relates to it at https://answers.launchpad.net/software-
center/+question/142628 , particularly in relation to skovprodukter's
question in this bug.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of
** Changed in: software-center (Ubuntu)
Milestone: later = None
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/435183
Title:
Doesn't display information about exact software license
--
I would also like to express the wish to be able to filter packages that
are non-free.
I'm aware that the definition of what is non-free is often contested but
I would hope that a few standard profiles could be used: FSF/DFSG/OSI to
which the majority of fractions would agree to.
This would
@grofaty:
Yes, summaries would be better, as your first two points explain well.
One thing we shouldn't overestimate (or fear) is the average user's apathy
towards licensing.They will come to like the Software Center because it offers
them a wealth of free (beer) programs. They would generally
I agree with the idea: we can't complain about users not understanding the
difference as long as we don't offer them the opportunity to do so.
It's a small but IMO meaningful way to help users apprehend the spirit of
Free/Open Source software.
A simple listing of the project's licenses (as soon
@Donjan Rodic,
I think there should be a summaries of license, because of two reasons:
1. Who likes to read 10 pages of original license?
2. Are ordinary people lawyers, so understanding law language?
3. Do ordinary people care about open source? For most of the people free as a
beer and free as
True, my mistake. I meant that the license name, being GPL or another,
and a brief explanation should be visible.
Now there is only a button labeled 'free', which I assume means 'free as
in beer'. The 'free as in speech'-part is only represented as a faint,
grey text at the bottom saying 'open
Regarding #3:
Is it possible to show GPL (with a brief explanation) for the packages
in own repositories? It would be a good beginning, though not possible
for all packages at the moment.
--
Doesn't display information about exact software license
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/435183
You
В Вск, 14/03/2010 в 11:46 +, Martin Olesen пишет:
Regarding #3:
Is it possible to show GPL (with a brief explanation) for the packages
in own repositories? It would be a good beginning, though not possible
for all packages at the moment.
What do you mean by Own repositories? Please note
20 matches
Mail list logo
