On Fri, Jul 15, 2005 at 09:08:59PM -0700, Joshua Daniel Franklin wrote:
>On 7/15/05, Brian Dessent wrote:
>> Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>
>> > Btw, the "other license" provision in the cygwin licensing web page was
>> > really meant as a way to accommodate other, already existing projects.
>
>So d
On 7/15/05, Brian Dessent wrote:
> Christopher Faylor wrote:
>
> > Btw, the "other license" provision in the cygwin licensing web page was
> > really meant as a way to accommodate other, already existing projects.
So do we want to change the wording at all?
> Last I checked RHEL and FC were *st
Christopher Faylor wrote:
> Btw, the "other license" provision in the cygwin licensing web page was
> really meant as a way to accommodate other, already existing projects.
And it was very gracious of them to do that. For an example of why this
makes life a lot easier, consider MySQL (GPL) and O
On Fri, Jul 15, 2005 at 12:25:35PM -0700, Max Kaehn wrote:
>On Fri, 2005-07-15 at 15:08 -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 15, 2005 at 11:53:22AM -0700, Max Kaehn wrote:
>>>I'm concerned about that FAQ entry giving incomplete information
>>
>>And, I'm always concerned about people who
On Fri, 2005-07-15 at 15:08 -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2005 at 11:53:22AM -0700, Max Kaehn wrote:
> >I'm concerned about that FAQ entry giving incomplete information
>
> And, I'm always concerned about people who can't find any information unless
> it is in in the FAQ.
Thi
On Fri, Jul 15, 2005 at 11:53:22AM -0700, Max Kaehn wrote:
>On Fri, 2005-07-15 at 14:30 -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>IMO, if we need additional wording about licensing, it should reference
>>the web site.
>
>I'm concerned about that FAQ entry giving incomplete information
And, I'm always con
On Fri, 2005-07-15 at 14:30 -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> IMO, if we need additional wording about licensing, it should reference
> the web site.
I'm concerned about that FAQ entry giving incomplete information--
it's very clear about the default case of the GPL, but it doesn't
mention the ex
On Fri, Jul 15, 2005 at 11:11:05AM -0700, Max Kaehn wrote:
>Because this patch includes details addressing the Cygwin license,
>I've included my conversation with Rebecca Ward (rward[at]redhat.com)
>verifying the propriety of language of the patch at the end of this
>message.
As nice as it is for
Because this patch includes details addressing the Cygwin license,
I've included my conversation with Rebecca Ward (rward[at]redhat.com)
verifying the propriety of language of the patch at the end of this
message.
---
2005-07-15 Max Kaehn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* how-programming.texinfo: Ad
