SGI Free SW license 1.1 compatability with Xfree86 style license

2000-06-28 Thread James A. Treacy
Due the complicated nature of part of the GLU library in mesa, the authors are considering switching to using the version distributed by SGI. The question has arisen as to whether the SGI Free SW license B is compatable with the DFSG. As I would like to see all of mesa stay in main, we would appr

Re: hp2pbm_2.0-1_i386.changes REJECTED

2000-06-28 Thread Camm Maguire
Greetings! I've put together a package of hp2pbm, and, after consulting with the author, have received his permission to license it under the GPL. Unfortunately, I believe the wording I proposed to him, and to which he has agreed, can be somewhat misinterpreted. I'd like the consensus of opinion

Re: hp2pbm_2.0-1_i386.changes REJECTED

2000-06-28 Thread Camm Maguire
Greetings! I've put together a package of hp2pbm, and, after consulting with the author, have received his permission to license it under the GPL. Unfortunately, I believe the wording I proposed to him, and to which he has agreed, can be somewhat misinterpreted. I'd like the consensus of opinio

Re: Non-free license in included source

2000-06-28 Thread Bolan Meek
Anthony Towns wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 28, 2000 at 09:48:30AM -0500, Bolan Meek wrote: > > Included in the original source, by Bob Kierski, and Kieth > > Fredericks, then of Cray & now-- who knows?-- is source > > for compface, by James Ashton, then of Sydney University, > > to provide for a display

Re: Non-free license in included source

2000-06-28 Thread Henning Makholm
Scripsit Bolan Meek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > * Written 11th November 1889. This looks like there is a fair chance that the code may have passed into the public domain by now. > * Permission is given to distribute these sources, as long as the > * copyright messages are not removed, and no mon

Re: Non-free license in included source

2000-06-28 Thread Bolan Meek
Anthony Towns wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 28, 2000 at 09:48:30AM -0500, Bolan Meek wrote: > > Included in the original source, by Bob Kierski, and Kieth > > Fredericks, then of Cray & now-- who knows?-- is source > > for compface, by James Ashton, then of Sydney University, > > to provide for a displa

Re: Non-free license in included source

2000-06-28 Thread Henning Makholm
Scripsit Bolan Meek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > * Written 11th November 1889. This looks like there is a fair chance that the code may have passed into the public domain by now. > * Permission is given to distribute these sources, as long as the > * copyright messages are not removed, and no mo

Re: Non-free license in included source

2000-06-28 Thread Anthony Towns
On Wed, Jun 28, 2000 at 09:48:30AM -0500, Bolan Meek wrote: > Included in the original source, by Bob Kierski, and Kieth > Fredericks, then of Cray & now-- who knows?-- is source > for compface, by James Ashton, then of Sydney University, > to provide for a display of XFaces: in a child window at >

Non-free license in included source

2000-06-28 Thread Bolan Meek
Greetings: God bless you. I am not a developer - yet (my application has been in for a few weeks), but I'm the erstwhile maintainer for both the orphaned Debian package, and the upstream source, of xmailtool. Included in the original source, by Bob Kierski, and Kieth Fredericks, then of Cray & n

Re: Non-free license in included source

2000-06-28 Thread Anthony Towns
On Wed, Jun 28, 2000 at 09:48:30AM -0500, Bolan Meek wrote: > Included in the original source, by Bob Kierski, and Kieth > Fredericks, then of Cray & now-- who knows?-- is source > for compface, by James Ashton, then of Sydney University, > to provide for a display of XFaces: in a child window at

Non-free license in included source

2000-06-28 Thread Bolan Meek
Greetings: God bless you. I am not a developer - yet (my application has been in for a few weeks), but I'm the erstwhile maintainer for both the orphaned Debian package, and the upstream source, of xmailtool. Included in the original source, by Bob Kierski, and Kieth Fredericks, then of Cray &