On 2009-04-17, Ken Arromdee arrom...@rahul.net wrote:
(And I was also under the impression that Debian follows the wishes of the
copyright holder, so it doesn't matter if this argument has any legal merit,
just that the FSF makes it.)
Note that there's no FSF copyright code in the
* Olly Betts:
It's possible this FAQ entry may not have been updated for GPLv3 - I
notice that it talks about PHP4, which is obsolete now, and PHP5 predates
GPLv3.
Yes, I think this may be the case.
I guess Florian's thinking is based on additional restrictions allowed
by GPLv3 7c:
On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 09:52:35 +0200 Florian Weimer wrote:
* Olly Betts:
It's possible this FAQ entry may not have been updated for GPLv3 - I
notice that it talks about PHP4, which is obsolete now, and PHP5 predates
GPLv3.
Yes, I think this may be the case.
The same page extensively
In message pine.lnx.4.44.0904171144360.27732-100...@violet.rahul.net,
Ken Arromdee arrom...@rahul.net writes
On Fri, 17 Apr 2009, Anthony W. Youngman wrote:
I was under the impression that the FSF thinks that if it's illegal to
link a program with GPL software and distribute that, it's also
On Sat, 18 Apr 2009, Anthony W. Youngman wrote:
I was under the impression that the FSF thinks that if it's illegal to
link a program with GPL software and distribute that, it's also
illegal if you
just distribute the other program and have the user do the link.
HOW? I hope the FSF
5 matches
Mail list logo
