program to link the current
libmysqlclient instead. See proftpd-mysql for an example of such kind
of programs.
Comments?
--
Francesco P. Lovergine
most the same problems, but for
a better definition of 'Opensource Initiative Compatible'.
Anyway, I think that using external references to validate
a license is quite weird. They should simply list principia
and possibly add a few additional well-known licenses.
--
Francesco P. Lovergine
a 'derived' product can be considered not (or no more) 'derived'
(i.e. how much of its code should change) by another one?
--
Francesco P. Lovergine
On Wed, Jul 28, 2004 at 05:05:04PM +0200, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote:
> While working on my little wiki on yardradius, I found something which
> could be of interest for this ML. Cistron Radiusd 1.6 is released under
> GPL, and pkg description says:
Damn it, I joined a thread i
he only upstream which should add the clause is curl one AFAIK, if needed
(I don't know what sort of license it uses). If you admit indirect
linking vincula, we could probably remove a good portion of main
in debian, due to bsd-gpl problem.
--
Francesco P. Lovergine
cense can be considered as covered by this FLOSS Exception (1).
Can it be considered so on the basis of Open Source Definitioni v 1.9? (2)
http://www.mysql.com/products/licensing/foss-exception.html (1)
http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition.php (2)
--
Francesco P. Lovergine
can develop this interaction.
>
> I'm not saying that we should make GRASS non-GPL, but hoping that we
> can find productive avenues to work with other open-source platforms
> that are not GPL (expanding the user, developer, and support base as
> well as making GR
script has that clause and not a license at all?
Wouldn't be considered public domain, I think...
This is a real case for a tiny script (published on a web site)
whose author is not reachable.
--
Francesco P. Lovergine
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 10:58:25AM +0100, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote:
> * Changing GRASS license in something different. In no way different from
>the double licensing option, indeed.
>
I missed a non secondary issue: GRASS uses third parties libraries and
all that could not be c
cations distributed on a commercial basis when the commerciality is
based on application functionality and not on a value ascribed to the
freely-distributed EPSG dataset.
These conditions are currently under review.
---
--
Francesco P. Lovergine
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
of endeavour, remember :)
>
Do you think so? If we would seriously concerned on SCO's ideas
sarge should release with HURD. And there's always the possibility
that SCO or someone else open a issue about it, too.
--
Francesco P. Lovergine
Is it possible for an upstream to change license from a BSD-old to GPL?
Consider the hypothesis that the product is a derivative work with a
few old contributors. I see no reasons to do not relicense after adding
a credits note as required in the BSD license.
Comments?
--
Francesco P
On Fri, Jan 24, 2003 at 02:11:06AM -0700, Kevin Rosenberg wrote:
> Good points -- I'll fill a bug against ftp.debian.org to remove the
> package.
>
Probably it could be converted in an installer.
--
Francesco P. Lovergine
7;t want to send a postcard, send a photograph of your local area or
of something geographically close to you that you find interesting.
It'll only cost you a dollar or two. Please do me a favor and send it.
Any hints
--
Francesco P. Lovergine
On Thu, Jan 30, 2003 at 01:06:22PM +0100, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote:
>
> Any hints
are welcome :)
--
Francesco P. Lovergine
> restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein.
> > ^^
>
> Yes, but that doesn't bind the author (assuming that he has the sole
> copyrigt on the program).
>
He's the only copyleft holder.
--
Francesco P. Lovergine
d-hoc GPL-like modified
license which contains also the postcard req. Or eventually
drop that requirement.
You could follow and contribute to the current discussion about this
issue on debian-legal:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2003/debian-legal-200301/msg00241.html
--
Francesco P. Lovergine
avoided...
Hints?
--
Francesco P. Lovergine
On Sun, Mar 09, 2003 at 07:16:07PM +0100, Hugo Espuny wrote:
> a) "Move it to non-free"
That's my opinion.
--
Francesco P. Lovergine
Dear all
we have some news about #167747 which is potentially of interest
of all packages which links OpenSSL libraries and MySQL libraries.
MySQL libraries currently are plain GPL, NOT LGPL as someone thought.
Stay tuned.
--
Francesco P. Lovergine
--- Begin Message ---
Dear Francesco
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 01:59:32PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le mer 02/04/2003 ` 13:26, Francesco P. Lovergine a icrit :
> > Dear all
> >
> > we have some news about #167747 which is potentially of interest
> > of all packages which links OpenSSL li
stuff. My best guess is to create a debconf interface
to ask for user's kernel-source and config file in order to run
the correct 'make dep' and possibly create on-fly the right binary deb
file. This is inspired to 'plex86' strategy.
Comments?
--
Francesco P. Lovergine
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
22 matches
Mail list logo
