* Jan Schumacher ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Hi,
>
> to my amusement I just found out, that a picture viewer called pornview has
> recently been added to the package pool. Although I can apreciate the honesty
> of calling it that, I am a bit worried about the logo it displays in its
> about bo
* Anthony Towns (aj@azure.humbug.org.au) wrote:
> A lot of prose does the same -- it's written to persuade or to explain
> or to record, rather than to entertain or amaze. Conversely, substantial
> amounts of software derive its justification from aesthetics and it's
> Debian's opinion that compute
* Brian T. Sniffen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> The MIT/X11 license and the GPL would both work, depending on whether
> you want a copyleft. The MIT license can probably be used just by
> itself. To use the GPL, though, you should probably put in a section
> which explains how your document can b
* Brian T. Sniffen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> iain d broadfoot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > * Brian T. Sniffen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> >> The MIT/X11 license and the GPL would both work, depending on whether
> >> you want a copyleft. The MIT
* Brian T. Sniffen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> iain d broadfoot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> > and possibly avoid referring directly to MSWord as well - a reference to
> >> > 'binary, closed file formats' would probably do the same job.
> &
* Mark Rafn ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Apr 2003, iain d broadfoot wrote:
>
> > but that allows MSWord docs, since i can edit them with Abiword, OOo
> > etc...
> >
> > maybe request a plain text version alongside any other formats? or
> >
>
* Richard Braakman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> More disturbing is the file src/win32/wavwrite.cpp, which has the
> GPL blurb followed by this:
>
> //-
> // File: WavWrite.cpp
> //
> // Desc: Wave file support for loading
* Anton Zinoviev ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On 12.VI.2003 at 16:21 Branden Robinson wrote:
> >
> > The Free Software Foundation promulgates, and the Debian Project
> > generally accepts, four essential freedoms as defining "Free
> > Software".
> >
> > The following is an enumeration of freedoms
* Jeremy Hankins ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I personally have advocated a fifth freedom:
> >
> > 5) The freedom to retain privacy in one's person, effects, and data,
> >including, but not limited to, all Works in one's possession and
> >
* Jeremy Hankins ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Having to include a changelog entry describing my modifications and
> (at minimum) that the original author didn't make the change is quite
> a bit different from simply giving some code to a friend w/o telling
> whether I even modified the code. One i
* Branden Robinson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
> Part 1. DFSG-freeness of the GNU Free Documentation License 1.2
>
> Please mark with an "X" the item that most closely approximates your
> opinion. Mark only one.
>
> [ X ] The GNU Free Documentation License, version 1.2, as published
>
11 matches
Mail list logo
