Re: A new practical problem with invariant sections?

2006-02-17 Thread Gledd Maynard
On Fri, Feb 17, 2006 at 06:32:58PM -0500, Anthony DeRobertis wrote: > And, further, the GFDL says I must preserve invariant sections > "unaltered in their text", not "unaltered in their octects"; I seriously > doubt that'd count... Would I be in violation if I was to take a GNU manual, untar it, u

Re: A new practical problem with invariant sections?

2006-02-17 Thread Anthony DeRobertis
Nathanael Nerode wrote: > Oh, it's possible, the section just ends up as unreadable garbage. Nothing > in > the GFDL requires that the invariant sections be readable. Well, actually, its not because devices easily barf on things that aren't ASCII. And, further, the GFDL says I must preserve i

Re: A new practical problem with invariant sections?

2006-02-17 Thread Anthony DeRobertis
Yorick Cool wrote: > Seeing as that is a void condition which is totally unenforceable[1], the > license is just the same as if the condition were inexistent, so yeah, > it's as good as free. Ok, I think my point has been missed. After numerous examples (having to carry around page after page of

Re: A new practical problem with invariant sections?

2006-02-17 Thread Anthony DeRobertis
Adam McKenna wrote: > I don't know of any device that rejects files of a particular encoding. Can > you give an example of such a device? My portable music player barfs pretty badly on anything that isn't ASCII. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Tr

Re: Regarding partner

2006-02-17 Thread Steve Langasek
On Thu, Feb 16, 2006 at 07:31:59AM -0800, Jim Westveer wrote: > Natarajan, > I am most likely not the person to be asking these questions of. > You ask: > >Can I conduct a Course called Debian Certified Engineer (DCE) > >without asking permission anybody > You may want to ask this question on

Re: Software license used for SHA-2 reference code

2006-02-17 Thread Mark Rafn
On Fri, 17 Feb 2006, Marco d'Itri wrote: It looks fine to me, but if it's still a draft then I think it would be useful to use a wording less vague than "misleading author or version information". Agreed. It's fine to say that the package must be labelled as to modifications made, but this p

Re: Software license used for SHA-2 reference code

2006-02-17 Thread Simon Josefsson
Marco d'Itri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >>Hi. A newly approved IETF document contains reference code for SHA-2, >>and they propose to use the following license: > >>Is this DFSG-free? > It looks fine to me, but if it's still a draft then I think it would be > useful

Re: A new practical problem with invariant sections?

2006-02-17 Thread Henning Makholm
Scripsit Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Perhaps we should consider amending section 4 of the DFSG so > that instead of only allowing one restriction on modification (changes > must be distributed in source form as patches to the unmodified > sources) to allowing any restrictions on a Debian Fre

Re: Software license used for SHA-2 reference code

2006-02-17 Thread Marco d'Itri
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >Hi. A newly approved IETF document contains reference code for SHA-2, >and they propose to use the following license: >Is this DFSG-free? It looks fine to me, but if it's still a draft then I think it would be useful to use a wording less vague than "misleading author o

Re: Software license used for SHA-2 reference code

2006-02-17 Thread Steve Langasek
On Fri, Feb 17, 2006 at 11:27:09AM +0100, Frank Küster wrote: > Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>Royalty free license to copy and use this software is granted, > >>provided that redistributed derivative works do not contain > >>misleading author or version information. Ro

Re: Software license used for SHA-2 reference code

2006-02-17 Thread Frank Küster
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>Royalty free license to copy and use this software is granted, >>provided that redistributed derivative works do not contain >>misleading author or version information. Royalty free license is >>also granted to make and use derivative wo

Re: Software license used for SHA-2 reference code

2006-02-17 Thread Simon Josefsson
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hi Simon, > > On Fri, Feb 17, 2006 at 10:22:32AM +0100, Simon Josefsson wrote: >> Hi. A newly approved IETF document contains reference code for SHA-2, >> and they propose to use the following license: > >> 1.1 License > >>Royalty free license to c

Software license used for SHA-2 reference code

2006-02-17 Thread Simon Josefsson
Hi. A newly approved IETF document contains reference code for SHA-2, and they propose to use the following license: 1.1 License Royalty free license to copy and use this software is granted, provided that redistributed derivative works do not contain misleading author or version inform

Re: Software license used for SHA-2 reference code

2006-02-17 Thread Steve Langasek
Hi Simon, On Fri, Feb 17, 2006 at 10:22:32AM +0100, Simon Josefsson wrote: > Hi. A newly approved IETF document contains reference code for SHA-2, > and they propose to use the following license: > 1.1 License >Royalty free license to copy and use this software is granted, >provided tha