Am Donnerstag, 16. November 2006 20:27 schrieb Per Inge Mathisen: > On 11/16/06, Dennis Schridde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > You mean this one? > > Yes. > > > Eidos, the game publisher, has been informed of our interpretation of > > the license. > > --- > > > > What about the last paragraph? Shall we strip it or shall we do it? > > As I still hope that we will get a good answer from Alex after Christmas, > > I'd simply strip it. But then this leaves it really really uncertain in > > the legal part IMO... > > Good point. Yes, the last paragraph should be omitted. And yes, it > makes it more legally uncertain, I agree, but I think better than > simply stating it is uncertain. Anyway, just make a decision on this, > and I'll be happy with whatever you pick. We can wait for a while for > an answer from Alex before we send something more formal to Eidos. I > do not think we are in a hurry. We've not been in a hurry since several years. ;)
I think that the text is good. Any objections? If not, this is how I think the next release will look like: LICENSE containing the GPL terms LICENSE.README containing Per's text All in one archive? (data/ and source) And let the distrobutors split it up if they want? Shouldn't be a problem for binary distributions and for source distributions like Gentoo, I think it won't be too problematic. Any other things I forgot? Wishes, complaints? --Dennis
pgpGdjpZK0bMM.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Warzone-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
