On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 20:12:42 -0200 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> One could claim that php4 is part of the operating system, just like
> they do with OpenSSL. That is nuts!
I agree with you that claiming PHP is part of the OS is a bit hard...
But anyway, Debian cannot ever use the OS exception, sinc
On Thu, Nov 11, 2004 at 08:12:42PM -0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> One could claim that php4 is part of the operating system, just like
> they do with OpenSSL. That is nuts!
The phrase "unless that component itself accompanies the executable" means
that Debian can never make use of that exceptio
On Thu, 11 Nov 2004, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > The copyright file includes a copy of the GNU Free Documentation
> > License, which has been judged by debian-legal to be
> > non-free. Please remove the non-free material from the package or
> > move the package to non-free.
>
> I do not want to beli
One could claim that php4 is part of the operating system, just like
they do with OpenSSL. That is nuts!
Sorry for introducing a reason for a flame.
I'd just like to say that I think the if one line is to be crossed, that
should mean that we should ask for the author permission, which would
make t
It would appear that turck-mmcache is covered under the GPL. However, it
links against php4, whose license is incompatible w/ the GPL. Is there
some sort of exception clause that was left out of the copyright file, or
are we violating the turck-mmcache license?
Brian M. Carlson writes:
> Package: libgcc1
> Version: 1:4.0-0pre0
> Severity: serious
>
> The copyright file includes a copy of the GNU Free Documentation
> License, which has been judged by debian-legal to be non-free. Please
> remove the non-free material from the package or move the package to
Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > This contaminates other software, by terminating for any patent action
> > against Cisco about anything. It even seems to contaminate hardware!
> Note that it only terminates the patent license, which just takes us
>
MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have not read the patents, so I have no idea what these apply to and I
> suspect it's better that I shouldn't know.
>
> Daniel Quinlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Here is the IIM license:
>> http://www.ietf.org/ietf/IPR/cisco-ipr-draft-fenton-identified-ma
I have not read the patents, so I have no idea what these apply to and I
suspect it's better that I shouldn't know.
Daniel Quinlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Here is the IIM license:
> http://www.ietf.org/ietf/IPR/cisco-ipr-draft-fenton-identified-mail-00.txt
This contaminates other software,
9 matches
Mail list logo
