Re: Free Pine?
On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 05:56:28PM +0300, Juhapekka Tolvanen wrote: > http://home.sol.no/~egilk/mana.html I was curious to see it, but I can't download. Ftp server does not allow anonymous connection... -- Christian Surchi | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | www.debian.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | www.firenze.linux.it -- Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for.
Re: MIT License?
On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 07:37:45PM -0300, Nicol?s Lichtmaier wrote: > > I release this software under the MIT license. (No, not the GPL > > license. Mainly because I do not quite understand the GPL license > > myself as I do with the MIT and the BSD types.) > > MIT license is: > > Do whatever you want with this. You can even branch proprietary > software are you are not forced to contribute back neither to me nor to the > community. Just keep my name in the source code. > > > GPL license is: > > You may use this software for anything you like, but I'm forcing you > to keep any derived work under the same kind of freedom. You may make profit > by using or selling this software (or derivates), but if you give a binary > to anyone, you must offer them the source code too. Ok, thanks everybody. I guess Mikael will stay with MIT then, right? BTW, if its such a nice license, why don't whe have it in /usr/share/common-licenses/ ? Christian
Re: MIT License?
Scripsit "Christian T. Steigies" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > BTW, if its such a nice license, why don't whe have it in > /usr/share/common-licenses/ ? The population in /usr/share/common-licences/ is not determined by how nice licences are but how common they are in Debian (hence the name). -- Henning Makholm "You propose to avoid dying? I will be interested to hear the method you plan for this endeavour."
Re: MIT License?
On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 02:13:02PM +0200, Henning Makholm wrote: > Scripsit "Christian T. Steigies" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > BTW, if its such a nice license, why don't whe have it in > > /usr/share/common-licenses/ ? > > The population in /usr/share/common-licences/ is not determined by > how nice licences are but how common they are in Debian (hence the > name). You have a point there. I grepped for MIT through the copyright files and found it 9 times (in the packages installed on my system). Not sure if all of those are exactly the same MIT, but it looks pretty close to me (ie exim). How common does it have to be to make it into common-licenses? (I don't want to start a flamewar here, I just ask out of curiousity. Also, if MIT were in common-licensenses, I wouldn't even have asked initially about the license). Christian.
Re: Free Pine?
On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 12:03:44PM +0200, Christian Surchi wrote: > On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 05:56:28PM +0300, Juhapekka Tolvanen wrote: > > > http://home.sol.no/~egilk/mana.html > > I was curious to see it, but I can't download. Ftp server does not allow > anonymous connection... I found a copy at ftp://ftp.kvaleberg.com/pub/mana-4.0beta.tar.gz, I guess it's a mirror. A whole lot of warnings when trying to compile it, but it looks interesting. Chris A -- Chris Allegrettahttp://www.asty.org "I can't be calm, no no no no no no. I'm the MASTER of the MECHANICAL *STUFF*! And I have to HELP YOU!" - Artemis Gordon, Wild Wild West
Re: Free Pine?
* Chris Allegretta | I found a copy at ftp://ftp.kvaleberg.com/pub/mana-4.0beta.tar.gz, I | guess it's a mirror. A whole lot of warnings when trying to compile it, | but it looks interesting. Actually, I think it's the official site. The official homepage for Mana is: http://www.kvaleberg.com/mana.html Martin pgpFgfRfsMvBh.pgp Description: PGP signature
Documentation
Hi, do I need some sort of a special license if I want to package some docs that are availabe for free on a website? Michael P.S.: Please CC me on replies since I'm not subscribed here. -- Michael Meskes Michael@Fam-Meskes.De Go SF 49ers! Go Rhein Fire! Use Debian GNU/Linux! Use PostgreSQL!
Re: Documentation
On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 04:33:08PM -0700, Michael Meskes wrote: > Hi, > > do I need some sort of a special license if I want to package some docs that > are availabe for free on a website? Yes. Just because they are available for free on a website, doesn't mean that you have any special permission wrt. copyright law, aside from implict permission to download. -- David Starner - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http/ftp: dvdeug.net.dhis.org It was starting to rain on the night that they cried forever, It was blinding with snow on the night that they screamed goodbye. - Dio, "Rock and Roll Children"
Re: MIT License?
On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 07:24:49AM -0500, Christian T. Steigies wrote: > You have a point there. I grepped for MIT through the copyright files > and found it 9 times (in the packages installed on my system). Not > sure if all of those are exactly the same MIT, but it looks pretty > close to me (ie exim). How common does it have to be to make it into > common-licenses? At this point? Probably if it were in a hundred or two distinct source packages we should take a look at putting it in common. -- Raul
Re: MIT License?
30.08.2000 pisze Christian T. Steigies ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > You have a point there. I grepped for MIT through the copyright files > and found it 9 times (in the packages installed on my system). Not > sure if all of those are exactly the same MIT, but it looks pretty > close to me (ie exim). The exim itself is GPLed. It is eximon, which contains some MIT-copyrighted code (read /usr/share/doc/exim/copyright more carefully ;-) Jubal -- [ Miros/law L Baran, baran-at-knm-org-pl, neg IQ, cert AI ] [ 0101010 is ] [ BOF2510053411, makabra.knm.org.pl/~baran/, alchemy pany ] [ The Answer ] When you do not know what you are doing, do it neatly.
imap mailbox killer
Package: imap Version: 4.7c-1 (Juhapekka Tolvanen's messages may be found on these mailing lists: debian-devel@lists.debian.org,debian-legal@lists.debian.org) Man, you got great headers on your messages! I don't know if it was your intension, but you managed to totally screw up my inbox (no hard feelings)! The IMAP daemon went crazy trying to make sense of that box and put it's holy counts on the "Subject: DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA". Is this a security hole? Anybody else suffering from it? Cristian -- I respect faith, but doubt is what gets you an education. -- Wilson Mizner
