hi Grzegorz,
--- Grzegorz Prokopski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Q: "Kaffe is free implementation of Java Virtual
> Machine and ClassLib
> which are both available under the terms of GPL2
> license. How does
> this affect possibility of using kaffe as
> development and runtime
> platform for other
Thomas Bushnell, BSG writes:
> Frank Mittelbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~ > more ~/tex.web
> > % This program is copyright (C) 1982 by D. E. Knuth; all rights are
> > reserved.
> > % Copying of this file is authorized only if (1) you are D. E. Knuth, or if
> > %
Thomas Bushnell, BSG writes:
> Frank Mittelbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I'm talking of requiring that the work identifies itself by name via
> > interface to other works (something that could be checked by a
> > computer)
>
> What I want to highlight is how radically different th
On Mon, Aug 05, 2002 at 05:03:02PM -0400, Boris Veytsman wrote:
> I think you mix things here a lot.
>
> 1. We already discussed the fact that LaTeX does have a patch
>mechanism. We demonstrated it here.
The crucial difference is that the TeX patching happens at build time,
and the restrictio
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Bushnell, BSG)
> Date: 05 Aug 2002 13:45:17 -0700
>
> You can't change tex.web, but you can do *anything* you like to it, as
> long as you do so via patch files. And in Knuth's wacked out language
> (WEB), he even has a decent automatic patch file mechanism *bui
Boris Veytsman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In other words, I do not think that Debian Project's interpretation of
> DFSG is exactly the same as Thomas Bushnell's one. Until I see the
> former, I think my opinion here is not worse than your opinion.
The consensus of the developers on the list i
Frank Mittelbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~ > more ~/tex.web
> % This program is copyright (C) 1982 by D. E. Knuth; all rights are reserved.
> % Copying of this file is authorized only if (1) you are D. E. Knuth, or if
> % (2) you make absolutely no changes to your copy. (Th
Frank Mittelbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm talking of requiring that the work identifies itself by name via
> interface to other works (something that could be checked by a
> computer)
What I want to highlight is how radically different this is from what
TeX actually requires.
You can't
Thomas Bushnell, BSG writes:
> Frank Mittelbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > the problem with Don's work is, that you have to make assumptions or raise
> > opinions on what he means. but assuming he clarifies or you pick an
> > interpretation it then needs a discussion on whether it fits
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Bushnell, BSG)
> Date: 05 Aug 2002 13:01:07 -0700
>
> Now, you treat this is as if there are merely differing
> interpretations of DFSG-4. But there are not. The only interpretors
> of DFSG-4 are the Debian Project. Nobody else. We don't make any
> kind of pr
Frank Mittelbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> the problem with Don's work is, that you have to make assumptions or raise
> opinions on what he means. but assuming he clarifies or you pick an
> interpretation it then needs a discussion on whether it fits the not
> completely unambiguous, interpret
Branden Robinson writes:
> > and only acceptable if it can't be checked by a computer as being the
> > original.
>
> It would be trivially easy to circumvent computer checks. What about
> case-sensitivity? Can I trust a computer to catch ALL of the following
> uses of "TeX"?
I'm talking
> Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2002 14:07:45 -0500
> From: Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> It is *human* confusion that Knuth has sought to avoid, not confusion on
> the part of computers. Strictly speaking, computers don't get confused.
> They do what they're told, or throw an exception.
>
[...]
On Mon, Aug 05, 2002 at 09:43:20PM +0200, Frank Mittelbach wrote:
> > > really, what is behind all this aren't file names but works (plural),
> and each
> > > of such works is supposed not to claim itself as the original (to other
> > > related works) after it was modified, eg a font is a work
Boris Veytsman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I understand this opinion. Your assertion that DFSG-4 does not protect
> file names logically follows from it. The problem is, I do not share
> this opinion. This does not make neither of us a person with an
> unhealthy mind; however, there must be some
Grzegorz Prokopski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I tried to google the aswer to my question, but it didn't work.
> So I'd like to ask you here.
>
> Q: "Kaffe is free implementation of Java Virtual Machine and ClassLib
> which are both available under the terms of GPL2 license. How does
Glenn Maynard writes:
> On Mon, Aug 05, 2002 at 07:37:22PM +0200, Frank Mittelbach wrote:
> > really, what is behind all this aren't file names but works (plural), and
> > each
> > of such works is supposed not to claim itself as the original (to other
> > related works) after it was modified
Branden Robinson writes:
> On Mon, Aug 05, 2002 at 02:23:31PM -0400, Itai Zukerman wrote:
> > >> What're your plans for tonight?
> > >
> > > Watch one of the 6 DVDs I got in the mail, or some of the many dragon
> > > ball
> > > Zs I probably have on Tivo, go to your place, watch class, go ou
I think one thing to keep in mind is whether or not your application is
binding to any kaffe-specific features. For instance, if you have a
non-GPL application that binds to some of the Kaffe-specific internal
classes (unlikely but possible) then I think you can make a strong
arguement that your ap
Branden Robinson writes:
> On Mon, Aug 05, 2002 at 06:59:56PM +0200, Frank Mittelbach wrote:
> > but Don hasn't put his work out as a whole with a license
>
> Then to what, exactly, do his statements in comp.text.tex on Wed, 23 Feb
> 1994 03:34:01 GMT apply?
>
> To nothing at all? Was he
On Mon, Aug 05, 2002 at 02:23:31PM -0400, Itai Zukerman wrote:
> >> What're your plans for tonight?
> >
> > Watch one of the 6 DVDs I got in the mail, or some of the many dragon ball
> > Zs I probably have on Tivo, go to your place, watch class, go out to
> > celebrate, pass out, wake up when my he
On Mon, Aug 05, 2002 at 07:37:22PM +0200, Frank Mittelbach wrote:
> Branden Robinson writes:
> > On Mon, Aug 05, 2002 at 11:04:56AM -0400, Boris Veytsman wrote:
> > > 1. As a true CS professor, Knuth distinguishes between the program
> > >(i.e. the code of the program) and the name of the pr
On Mon, Aug 05, 2002 at 07:37:22PM +0200, Frank Mittelbach wrote:
> really, what is behind all this aren't file names but works (plural), and each
> of such works is supposed not to claim itself as the original (to other
> related works) after it was modified, eg a font is a work and plain.tex is a
>> What're your plans for tonight?
>
> Watch one of the 6 DVDs I got in the mail, or some of the many dragon ball
> Zs I probably have on Tivo, go to your place, watch class, go out to
> celebrate, pass out, wake up when my head hits the table, pass out again,
> excuse myself from the celebrations,
On Mon, Aug 05, 2002 at 06:59:56PM +0200, Frank Mittelbach wrote:
> but Don hasn't put his work out as a whole with a license
Then to what, exactly, do his statements in comp.text.tex on Wed, 23 Feb
1994 03:34:01 GMT apply?
To nothing at all? Was he just talking to hear himself talk, or was he
t
On Mon, 2002-08-05 at 10:11, Grzegorz Prokopski wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I tried to google the aswer to my question, but it didn't work.
> So I'd like to ask you here.
>
> Q: "Kaffe is free implementation of Java Virtual Machine and ClassLib
> which are both available under the terms of GPL2 license.
> Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2002 19:52:28 +0200
> From: Frank Mittelbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> that remark with the historical context is not clear to me as the
> names for the collective works have been trademarked (Computer
> Modern not i think)
http://www.yandy.com/cm.htm says:
(TM) Computer Moder
> Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2002 11:05:28 -0500
> From: Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> You have an unhealthy obsession with filenames. A filename is no more
Who is trying to be offensive now? Branden, cannot we make this a
civil discussion, even given the fact we disagree? Believe me, I've
led en
Branden Robinson writes:
> Perhaps it strains your credulity, but that's all Debian really
> requires. Such statements from a copyright holder are a license, every
no it does not. but as there are interpretative statements around (by Don) as
well as copyright notices on individual files and cop
Branden Robinson writes:
> On Mon, Aug 05, 2002 at 11:04:56AM -0400, Boris Veytsman wrote:
> > I cannot claim to understand *all* intricacies of Don's great brain,
> > but I always understood his intentions with respect to TeX and friends
> > in the following way:
> >
> > 1. As a true CS pro
Hello!
I tried to google the aswer to my question, but it didn't work.
So I'd like to ask you here.
Q: "Kaffe is free implementation of Java Virtual Machine and ClassLib
which are both available under the terms of GPL2 license. How does
this affect possibility of using kaffe as development and ru
On Mon, Aug 05, 2002 at 05:40:00PM +0200, Frank Mittelbach wrote:
> I wasn't questioning that, I was pointing out that while this is legally true,
> many people misunderstand the fact that they use a "legal term" and use it for
> something slightly different (and even some people on this list)
All
Branden Robinson writes:
> On Mon, Aug 05, 2002 at 11:47:59AM +0200, Frank Mittelbach wrote:
> > It did however happen, several times by individuals and that was all I was
> > referring to. Perhaps you missed those posts which wouldn't be surprising
> > given the number of posts on the whole su
On Mon, Aug 05, 2002 at 09:53:20AM -0600, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 05, 2002 at 09:33:37AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > I repeat: the file renaming requirement is not DFSG-free, and you
> > wanting it to be so will not make it so. DFSG 4 does not permit it.
>
> 4. Integrity of Th
On Mon, Aug 05, 2002 at 11:04:56AM -0400, Boris Veytsman wrote:
> I cannot claim to understand *all* intricacies of Don's great brain,
> but I always understood his intentions with respect to TeX and friends
> in the following way:
>
> 1. As a true CS professor, Knuth distinguishes between the pro
On Mon, Aug 05, 2002 at 09:33:37AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> I repeat: the file renaming requirement is not DFSG-free, and you
> wanting it to be so will not make it so. DFSG 4 does not permit it.
4. Integrity of The Author's Source Code
The license may restrict source-code from be
Branden Robinson writes:
> On Mon, Aug 05, 2002 at 12:01:09PM +0200, Frank Mittelbach wrote:
> > Even here on the list I noted that several people (which I presume to to
> > be
> > debian-legal regulars) used "public domain" in different senses.
>
> There is only one sense.
I wasn't quest
On Mon, Aug 05, 2002 at 11:47:59AM +0200, Frank Mittelbach wrote:
> It did however happen, several times by individuals and that was all I was
> referring to. Perhaps you missed those posts which wouldn't be surprising
> given the number of posts on the whole subject. For example
>
> http://lists.
> Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2002 01:54:02 -0500
> From: Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> These statements are in tension. If Professor Knuth asserts the latter,
> he logically *cannot* be asserting the former.
>
> Knuth is asserting his copyright to impose the restrictions described
> above; the
On Mon, Aug 05, 2002 at 12:01:09PM +0200, Frank Mittelbach wrote:
> Even here on the list I noted that several people (which I presume to to be
> debian-legal regulars) used "public domain" in different senses.
There is only one sense.
> > Someday, Professor Knuth should be contacted and asked
Ralf Treinen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Can someone point me to examples of such exception clauses to GPL?
>
> -Ralf.
Not exactly the same case, but xwatch is GPLed and has an exemption
clause to link to a non-free library. The add-on is the third paragraph
below:
XWatch - a tool to monitor
Branden Robinson writes:
> On Fri, Aug 02, 2002 at 01:34:43AM -0700, C.M. Connelly wrote:
> >I have put these systems into the public domain so that people
> >everywhere can use the ideas freely if they wish.
> [...]
> >As stated on the copyright pages of Volumes~B, D, and~E,
> >
Branden Robinson writes:
> On Fri, Aug 02, 2002 at 10:54:37AM +0200, Frank Mittelbach wrote:
> > However I think it would be a poor solution to argue legally that you
> > are able to ignore Don's explicit wishes simply because he is a
> > Computer Scientist rather than a lawyer and was unable t
FROM: COL. BANGI HAMA [RTD]
DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO.
Tel No: Your country Intl. access code +873762692483
Fax No: your country Intl. Access code +873762692485
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dear Sir/Madam,
SEEKING YOUR IMMEDIATE ASSISTANCE.
Please Permit me to make your acquaintance in so
Thanks to everybody for theire replies. It seems safest then to ask
upstream to add an exception clause, also in his own interest.
Can someone point me to examples of such exception clauses to GPL?
-Ralf.
On Sun, Aug 04, 2002 at 03:52:58PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Interpreters are not expl
On Fri, Aug 02, 2002 at 10:54:37AM +0200, Frank Mittelbach wrote:
> Knuth is unfortunately (or fortunately if you go by the legal content only?)
> somewhat inprecise by using words like "public domain" together with
> "copyrighted" etc.
It's more than imprecise, it is contradictory. That which is
On Fri, Aug 02, 2002 at 01:34:43AM -0700, C.M. Connelly wrote:
>I have put these systems into the public domain so that people
>everywhere can use the ideas freely if they wish.
[...]
>As stated on the copyright pages of Volumes~B, D, and~E,
>anybody can make use of my programs in w
47 matches
Mail list logo
