Re: [Fink-devel] esound-0.2.35-8
RLD wrote: Problem getting binary for esound via apt-get upgrade: Failed to fetch file:/sw/fink/dists/unstable/main/binary-darwin-powerpc//sound/ esound_0.2.35-8_darwin-powerpc.deb Size mismatch This usually indicates that you forgot to run apt-get update first. -- Martin --- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595alloc_id=14396op=click ___ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
[Fink-devel] Re: License for .info and .patch files
David R. Morrison [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Here's my take on this licensing issue, for what it's worth. I think we should explicitly indicate that authors of .info files are *contributing* those files to the fink project when they submit them for inclusion in the fink trees. As contributed parts of the whole, these files may be modified by others working on fink, and will be distributed along with fink and under the same license conditions as fink itself That makes a lot of sense. We should add a note about this on the Submissions tracker new-item header. When I started the thread, though, I was trying to draw a distinction for the .patch files. I'd still like to see us make that distinction, because I would like everyone to feel free to borrow our patch files for their own use. In that spirit, it makes sense to me that we would say that the patch files inherited the same license their project was released under. By their project, do you mean Fink or each's package? If the latter, I don't think that's necessarily correct for Restrictive packages. Who knows what crazy redistribution or derived-work terms the author may have attached. Well hmm, is a .patch or a .info a derived work (which has copyright implications) or just some insrtuctions one follows (or causes Fink to follow) and act upon one's personal copy of the sources? dan -- Daniel Macks [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.netspace.org/~dmacks --- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595alloc_id=14396op=click ___ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] Re: License for .info and .patch files
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: RIPEMD160 Daniel E. Macks wrote: | David R. Morrison [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: | |Here's my take on this licensing issue, for what it's worth. | |I think we should explicitly indicate that authors of .info files are |*contributing* those files to the fink project when they submit them for |inclusion in the fink trees. As contributed parts of the whole, these |files may be modified by others working on fink, and will be distributed |along with fink and under the same license conditions as fink itself | | | That makes a lot of sense. We should add a note about this on the | Submissions tracker new-item header. | Actually we should communicate this on the fornt page and add a good explanation as a seperate page why we are doinbg this and who agreed on doing it. so please give me the outline and I shall happily do the rest. ~ Even though I still pledge for dual licensing - -d -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (Darwin) iD8DBQFCSpcPPMoaMn4kKR4RA1asAJ9N/muPA75wB9UW0qrRWx04I64kvwCffCIS +kyoJ1Hg8Co/+u1WvjXZ/Wo= =Rlmz -END PGP SIGNATURE- --- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595alloc_id=14396op=click ___ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] Re: License for .info and .patch files
How does Debian handle this? They use a similar info/patch system, right? And I've seen from other issues that debian-legal is very involved in licensing issues so I'm guessing they've thought this out. Hanspeter -- Hanspeter Niederstrasser, Ph.D.Dept. of Cell Biology hniederstrasser at cellbiology.wustl.edu Campus Box 8228 Cooper Lab 660 South Euclid Avenue Washington University in St. Louis St. Louis, MO 63110 --- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595alloc_id=14396op=click ___ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] License for .info and .patch files
On Mar 30, 2005, at 10:19 AM, Anthony DeRobertis wrote: But once you filter out the idea (also not copyrightable, see Title 17, Sec. 102(b)), I suspect you'll find that the expression of that idea is quite limited by the technical and policy requirements of the info file. True, but that is not the case here. We are not extracting the ideas from .info files and creating new ones; we are copying and distributing others' work as-is. This is what I am saying is covered by copyright law. And yes, having licensing on info files clearly given by their authors would be a very good thing. Now I'm really confused. If I understand your point correctly, that .info files have no protection under copyright law, then what need is there for licensing them? Trevor --- This SF.net email is sponsored by Demarc: A global provider of Threat Management Solutions. Download our HomeAdmin security software for free today! http://www.demarc.com/Info/Sentarus/hamr30 ___ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] License for .info and .patch files
Trevor Harmon wrote: On Mar 30, 2005, at 10:19 AM, Anthony DeRobertis wrote: But once you filter out the idea (also not copyrightable, see Title 17, Sec. 102(b)), I suspect you'll find that the expression of that idea is quite limited by the technical and policy requirements of the info file. True, but that is not the case here. We are not extracting the ideas from .info files and creating new ones; we are copying and distributing others' work as-is. This is what I am saying is covered by copyright law. When there are limited numbers of ways to express something, the idea and the expression are the same, and there is no copyright protection (as copyright can not protect an idea). This is the merger doctrine. And yes, having licensing on info files clearly given by their authors would be a very good thing. Now I'm really confused. If I understand your point correctly, that .info files have no protection under copyright law, then what need is there for licensing them? Having the author say you can use this is never a bad thing. And (see my original message), I believe that portions of some fink files are copyrightable. --- This SF.net email is sponsored by Demarc: A global provider of Threat Management Solutions. Download our HomeAdmin security software for free today! http://www.demarc.com/Info/Sentarus/hamr30 ___ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
[Fink-devel] latest fink, convinience Bug?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: RIPEMD160 When you develop away and you alter an info file, check it into CVs and then do something like: fink list --maintainer=Darian Fink has detected that your package index cache is missing or out of date, but does not have privileges to modify it. Re-run fink as root, for example with a fink index command, to update the cache. You see the error message. Is that a convenience bug? What ya think? - -d -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (Darwin) iD8DBQFCS6IHPMoaMn4kKR4RA7BlAJ9Lzi2X+J3pAZDQ3stRPcWNJTkyNQCeNtWW JRkD3WqAijf2fbAGx6foZJ0= =apJ9 -END PGP SIGNATURE- --- This SF.net email is sponsored by Demarc: A global provider of Threat Management Solutions. Download our HomeAdmin security software for free today! http://www.demarc.com/Info/Sentarus/hamr30 ___ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
