On Tue, 2002-10-01 at 21:20, Lukas Geyer wrote:
The South African government passed a law (apparently two
month ago) which requires all crypto providers to register with the
government for some fee. The law can be found under
http://co.za/ect/a25-02.pdf (this is ridiculously large, seems to be
reopen 143063
thanks
On Wed, Oct 02, 2002 at 12:18:16PM -0500, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
This is an automatic notification regarding your Bug report
#143063: mmix-src: why in non-free?,
which was filed against the mmix-src package.
It has been closed by one of the developers, namely
On Tue, 2002-10-01 at 21:20, Lukas Geyer wrote:
The South African government passed a law (apparently two
month ago) which requires all crypto providers to register with the
government for some fee. The law can be found under
http://co.za/ect/a25-02.pdf (this is ridiculously large, seems to be
Julian Gilbey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks for adopting the package. However, I really do not understand
how it conflicts with point four:
DFSG point four:
4. Integrity of The Author's Source Code
The license may restrict source-code from being distributed in modified
Jeff Licquia [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(quoting the relevant law)
There is a definitions section, in which we find:
-
cryptography product means any product that makes use of
cryptographic techniques and is used by a sender or recipient of data
messages for the purposes of ensuring--
Vorresti Davvero Guadagnare con Internet?
Bene, la prima cosa da fare è salvare su disco questa pagina
per averla a portata di mano anche se il tuo PC non è connesso a Internet,
poi copia tutto in Word o in Blocco Note e stampalo,
così lo potrai leggere con più attenzione.
On Thu, 2002-10-03 at 09:30, Joe Moore wrote:
Jeff Licquia [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(quoting the relevant law)
There is a definitions section, in which we find:
-
cryptography product means any product that makes use of
cryptographic techniques and is used by a sender or recipient
(Sorry for the massive CCs; please let me know if you read the list and
don't want more.)
On Thu, 2002-10-03 at 08:18, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
It has been argued (during the LaTeX license debate) that the license
may require derived works to carry a different name refers to the
software or
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Now the mmix license (from boilerplate.w, minus markup):
(c) 1999 Donald E. Knuth
This file may be freely copied and distributed, provided that no
changes whatsoever are made.
This allows unmodified distribution.
All users
On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 09:18:14AM -0400, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
Julian Gilbey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks for adopting the package. However, I really do not understand
how it conflicts with point four:
DFSG point four:
4. Integrity of The Author's Source Code
Scripsit Julian Gilbey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Furthermore, mmix agrees with (at least one reading of) point four
both in letter and spirit: the source cannot be distributed in a
modified form without changing filenames, but change (patch) files are
permitted; in fact, a mechanism for using them is
On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 10:06:00PM +0200, Henning Makholm wrote:
Scripsit Julian Gilbey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Furthermore, mmix agrees with (at least one reading of) point four
both in letter and spirit: the source cannot be distributed in a
modified form without changing filenames, but
On Wed, Oct 02, 2002 at 09:35:13PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 01:02:11AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
On Wed, Oct 02, 2002 at 07:39:17PM -0400, Brian Ristuccia wrote:
[libecc/edc is non-free]
Actually, the author offered to relicense the problem code under
the GPL for
On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 10:37:08PM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote:
On Wed, Oct 02, 2002 at 09:35:13PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
[libecc/edc is non-free]
In the meantime, the packages that include this code need to be moved
out of main.
What is the best way to do this? Bugreport
On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 01:34:06PM -0400, Brian Sniffen wrote:
Changes are permissible only if the modified file is given a new
name, different from the names of existing files in the MMIXware
package, and only if the modified file is clearly identified as
not being part of
On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 08:30:34AM -0600, Joe Moore wrote:
Jeff Licquia [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(quoting the relevant law)
There is a definitions section, in which we find:
-
cryptography product means any product that makes use of
cryptographic techniques and is used by a sender
Scripsit Andreas Metzler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cdrecord has this:
|-
| This software is under GPL with the following limitations:
| - You may not modify certain copyright messages in cdrecord.c
| See cdrecord.c for further information.
That appears to
On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 11:04:11PM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote:
| This software is under GPL with the following limitations:
This alone reminds me of this:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2002/debian-legal-200205/msg00062.html
In short (as I understand it), placing software under the GPL
On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 06:48:31PM -0400, Glenn Maynard wrote:
In short (as I understand it), placing software under the GPL with
additional restrictions simply doesn't work.
It does, if you dual-license it. If you don't, then in general you've
got software without a license.
--
G. Branden
20 matches
Mail list logo
