Re: [oss-security] According to www.virustotal.com, lists.debian.org are hosting attachment .DOC virus
Hallo! Du (Adam D. Barratt) hast geschrieben: > If you want an answer from those who deal with lists, you have to ask them. > debian-legal@ is just another mailing list. The file has been removed. Yours, Cord, Debian Listmaster of the day -- https://lists.debian.org
License-Question (expanded GPL)
Hi. I want to add a package to Debian with the following License-Statement: The Simple PHP Blog is released under the GNU Public License. You are free to use and modify the Simple PHP Blog. All changes must be uploaded to SourceForge.net under Simple PHP Blog. Credit must be give to the original author and the Simple PHP Blog logo graphic must appear on the site and link to the project on SourceForge.net Does this make the package incompatible to DFSG? Cord PS: Please keep the Cc on the wnpp-bug #421513 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
sphpblog License-Question (modified/expanded GPL)
Hi. I want to add a package to Debian with the following License-Statement: The Simple PHP Blog is released under the GNU Public License. You are free to use and modify the Simple PHP Blog. All changes must be uploaded to SourceForge.net under Simple PHP Blog. Credit must be give to the original author and the Simple PHP Blog logo graphic must appear on the site and link to the project on SourceForge.net Does this make the package incompatible to DFSG? Cord PS: Please keep the Cc on the wnpp-bug #421513 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[hugh@mimosa.com: RE: Bug#120759: jove doesn't seem to have an free license.]
Hi. would you comment on these two suggestions? are they ok for us? thanks, Cord PS: please Cc me on replies. - Forwarded message from D. Hugh Redelmeier [EMAIL PROTECTED] - X-Envelope-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 22:13:10 -0500 (EST) From: D. Hugh Redelmeier [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Jonathan Payne [EMAIL PROTECTED], Cord Beermann [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Bug#120759: jove doesn't seem to have an free license. X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.1 required=5.0 tests=IN_REP_TO,COPYRIGHT_CLAIMED,LINE_OF_YELLING version=2.11 I want to resolve this. I'm annoyed at the length of the BSD and GNU licenses. The current JOVE notice is: / * This program is Copyright (C) 1986-1999 by Jonathan Payne. JOVE is * * provided to you without charge, and with no warranty. You may give * * away copies of JOVE, including sources, provided that this notice is * * included in all the files. * / How about this version instead, cut down from the Berkeley license, as per Charles' suggestion: Copyright 1986-2002 Jonathan Payne. All rights reserved. Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met: 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer. 2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution. THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE [EMAIL PROTECTED] ``AS IS'' AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES ARE DISCLAIMED. Or how about this one, a slightly beefed up version of our current notice: This program is Copyright (C) 1986-2002 by Jonathan Payne. JOVE is provided by Jonathan and Jovehacks without charge and without warranty. You may copy, modify, and distribute JOVE, provided that this notice is included in all the source files and documentation. Which do folks prefer? Are you concerned of either of these? Hugh Redelmeier [EMAIL PROTECTED] voice: +1 416 482-8253 - End forwarded message - -- Cord Beermann [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Privat) Antwort die bei JEDER Gelegenheit passt: 'Auch das geht vorbei.'
Fwd: Bug#120759: jove doesn't seem to have an free license.
Hi. I got this bug-report today. Does debian-legal share the opinion of Peter Makholm? Cord Please Cc [EMAIL PROTECTED] on answers. - Forwarded message from Peter Makholm [EMAIL PROTECTED] - X-Envelope-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Bug#120759: jove doesn't seem to have an free license. Reply-To: Peter Makholm [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Peter Makholm [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2001 15:56:08 +0100 Package: jove Version: 4.16.0.52-1 Severity: serious The license for jove does not comply to DFSG. In the jove package the following copyright notice is found: === /usr/share/doc/jove/copyright This package was debianized by Cord Beermann [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Sun, 17 Dec 2000 14:36:36 +0100. It was downloaded from ftp://ftp.cs.toronto.edu/cs/ftp/pub/hugh/jove-dev/ Copyright: # This program is Copyright (C) 1986-1999 by Jonathan Payne. JOVE is # # provided to you without charge, and with no warranty. You may give # # away copies of JOVE, including sources, provided that this notice is # # included in all the files. # === The does not comply to Debian Free Software Guidelines. Free Software should explicitly allow modifications to the program which tha above copyright doesn't do. This breaks DFSG clause 3. Jove should be removes from the main section af the archieve and put into non-free. Author could proberly be convinced that he should use a better license instead maybe the 2-clause BSD license (http://www.freebsd.org/copyright/freebsd-license.html) -- Når folk spørger mig, om jeg er nørd, bliver jeg altid ilde til mode og svarer lidt undskyldende: Nej, jeg bruger RedHat. -- Allan Olesen på dk.edb.system.unix - End forwarded message - -- Cord Beermann [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Privat) bongo rooomy: sehr angenehme athmosphare hier, sympatische Leute, starke executive (wie wir bayern es mogen), ansprechende Themen usw. -- bongo beschreibt das Wunder-Nett pgpAA4kGShoDa.pgp Description: PGP signature
