On Tue, 25 May 2010 00:11:23 +0200 Reinhard Tartler wrote:
[...]
On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 11:34:27 (CEST), Francesco Poli wrote:
The debian/copyright file for mplayer still lists the old mmx.h license.
this has been fixed first in ubuntu version
2:1.0~rc3+svn20090426-1ubuntu6, and that
retitle 396646 clarify mmx.h license
thanks
On Tue, 21 Nov 2006 01:02:27 +0100 Francesco Poli wrote:
the present bug (#396646) can be considered as fixed
once the new mmx.h is included in the mplayer Debian package.
The debian/copyright file for mplayer still lists the old mmx.h license.
On Sat, Nov 18, 2006 at 02:36:51PM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote:
On Sat, 18 Nov 2006 12:58:55 +0100 Diego Biurrun wrote:
Exactly.
The point I am trying to make is that, since I am not a qualified
lawyer, I don't feel confident enough that this file is uncopyrighted.
But *we do not need* to
On Wed, Nov 15, 2006 at 11:18:12PM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote:
On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 23:04:40 +0100 Diego Biurrun wrote:
On Wed, Nov 15, 2006 at 08:28:24PM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote:
[...]
Hence, I think the Right Thing(TM) to do is properly documenting
where the file `mmx.h' came
On Sat, 18 Nov 2006 12:58:55 +0100 Diego Biurrun wrote:
On Wed, Nov 15, 2006 at 11:18:12PM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote:
[...]
I'm not saying that you should insert a copyright and permission
notice *inside* the `mmx.h' file: I'm just suggesting that you
document where it came from and that
On Sun, 12 Nov 2006 20:01:23 +0100 Diego Biurrun wrote:
On Sun, Nov 12, 2006 at 07:30:32PM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote:
[...]
I've not yet seen the file taken from FFmpeg, so I cannot comment on
its copyrightability.
Take into account that determining whether something is or is not
On Wed, Nov 15, 2006 at 08:28:24PM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote:
On Sun, 12 Nov 2006 20:01:23 +0100 Diego Biurrun wrote:
On Sun, Nov 12, 2006 at 07:30:32PM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote:
[...]
I've not yet seen the file taken from FFmpeg, so I cannot comment on
its copyrightability.
On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 23:04:40 +0100 Diego Biurrun wrote:
On Wed, Nov 15, 2006 at 08:28:24PM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote:
[...]
Hence, I think the Right Thing(TM) to do is properly documenting
where the file `mmx.h' came from (that is to say: FFmpeg) and which
is the license the project we
On Sun, 12 Nov 2006 05:31:54 +0100 Diego Biurrun wrote:
On Sat, Nov 11, 2006 at 12:22:54AM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote:
On Fri, 10 Nov 2006 17:45:36 +0100 Diego Biurrun wrote:
On Wed, Nov 01, 2006 at 11:23:43PM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote:
[...]
There seems to be still a licensing
On Sun, 12 Nov 2006 19:18:31 +0100 Diego Biurrun wrote:
On Sun, Nov 12, 2006 at 05:56:09PM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote:
On Sun, 12 Nov 2006 05:31:54 +0100 Diego Biurrun wrote:
On Sat, Nov 11, 2006 at 12:22:54AM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote:
[...]
Which license is available under?
On Sun, Nov 12, 2006 at 05:56:09PM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote:
On Sun, 12 Nov 2006 05:31:54 +0100 Diego Biurrun wrote:
On Sat, Nov 11, 2006 at 12:22:54AM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote:
On Fri, 10 Nov 2006 17:45:36 +0100 Diego Biurrun wrote:
On Wed, Nov 01, 2006 at 11:23:43PM +0100,
On Sun, Nov 12, 2006 at 07:30:32PM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote:
On Sun, 12 Nov 2006 19:18:31 +0100 Diego Biurrun wrote:
On Sun, Nov 12, 2006 at 05:56:09PM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote:
On Sun, 12 Nov 2006 05:31:54 +0100 Diego Biurrun wrote:
On Sat, Nov 11, 2006 at 12:22:54AM +0100,
On Sat, Nov 11, 2006 at 12:22:54AM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote:
On Fri, 10 Nov 2006 17:45:36 +0100 Diego Biurrun wrote:
On Wed, Nov 01, 2006 at 11:23:43PM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote:
[...]
There seems to be still a licensing issue, though... :-(
According to its debian/copyright[1],
On Wed, Nov 01, 2006 at 11:23:43PM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote:
First of all, many thanks for the hard work that was necessary to get
MPlayer into Debian! :-)
You are welcome :-)
There seems to be still a licensing issue, though... :-(
According to its debian/copyright[1], mplayer
On Fri, 10 Nov 2006 17:45:36 +0100 Diego Biurrun wrote:
On Wed, Nov 01, 2006 at 11:23:43PM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote:
[...]
There seems to be still a licensing issue, though... :-(
According to its debian/copyright[1], mplayer includes a file named
mmx.h, whose licensing status
[...]
On Thu, 2 Nov 2006 11:55:23 +0100 A Mennucc wrote:
severity 396646 normal
retitle 396646 clarify and tidy up copyrights
thanks
I disagree with this severity downgrade.
A file lacking permission to modify and to redistribute is a serious
bug, IMHO.
ciao
Ciao!
On Wed, Nov 01, 2006 at
On Thu, 2 Nov 2006 14:52:30 +0100 Diego Biurrun wrote:
[...]
Note that libgsm is also available in Debian. You may wish to file a
bug against that package if this wording is a problem.
Done: it's bug #397047: thanks for suggesting...
--
But it is also tradition that times *must* and always
severity 396646 normal
retitle 396646 clarify and tidy up copyrights
thanks
ciao
On Wed, Nov 01, 2006 at 11:23:43PM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote:
There seems to be still a licensing issue, though... :-(
According to its debian/copyright[1], mplayer includes a file named
mmx.h
.
Where's
On Thu, Nov 02, 2006 at 11:55:23AM +0100, A Mennucc wrote:
On Wed, Nov 01, 2006 at 11:23:43PM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote:
BTW, there's another issue: the debian/copyright[1] file states:
| Name: GSM 06.10 library
.
The term use is vague and could be interpreted in a strict
Package: mplayer
Version: 1.0~rc1-1
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 2.2.1
Hi!
First of all, many thanks for the hard work that was necessary to get
MPlayer into Debian! :-)
There seems to be still a licensing issue, though... :-(
According to its debian/copyright[1], mplayer includes
20 matches
Mail list logo
