On 2014-09-03, Ian Jackson wrote:
> I think this is a restriction which contradicts the GPL text.
> Therefore:
>
> The JDK8 licence is GPL-incompatible. If there is anyone else's GPL
> code in JDK8 Oracle are violating the copyright of the other
> contributors.
>
> While the software is free for
On 2013-12-11, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> The other way round is to look at the two pieces on the right and say
> that it is perfectly fine for a LGPLv2+ library to be linked against a
> LGPLv3+ library without being upgraded to LGPLv3 [1], and therefore
> the GPLv2 program can use it.
Let's try a
On 2013-01-08, Simon Josefsson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Has the Open Web Foundation Contributor License Agreement Version 1.0
> licensed been reviewed for DFSG compatibility? I don't see it on these
> pages:
I read it as a Contributor License Agreement, and thus is only relevant
if you want to upstream
On 2009-06-16, Miriam Ruiz wrote:
> 2009/6/16 Martin Quinson :
>> Hello,
>>
>> I am considering packaging the TLA software suite, which is available
>> from
>> http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/people/lamport/tla/tools.html
>>
>> I am however not sure about the license (in attachement). It se
On 2008-03-28, Peter Saint-Andre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This is a cryptographically signed message in MIME format.
>
> --ms030303010806020208040803
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
> Sune Vuorela wro
On 2008-03-28, Peter Saint-Andre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This is a cryptographically signed message in MIME format.
>
> --ms020306050406060103010602
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
> Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>> It seems that the
On 2006-09-22, Michael Below <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From a practical point of view: I don't think this is intended by the
> Mozilla people. Probably they will grant you a license, if you ask.
Please read this:
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=354622
Do you still think they
On 2006-03-12, Walter Landry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I still don't see how Debian can comply with keeping the source to
> every version for a year
In kde-related packages (and probably also in gnome-related) have the
help files distributed in some docbook format - and the help thingie is
a do
On 2006-02-09, Matthew Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What really got me saying "whoa!" though is the blog post linked from the
> ticket comments -- the fourth paragraph seems to say that Savannah changed
> it's policy because Debian doesn't think the GFDL is DFSG-free. Worrying,
> if true.
9 matches
Mail list logo
