Re: ITP: pine (?)

1999-11-02 Thread Piotr Roszatycki
ot;Dexter" Roszatycki mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Forwarded message -- Date: Tue, 2 Nov 1999 11:52:30 +0100 (CET) From: Santiago Vila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Piotr Roszatycki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: Debian Development Mailing List Subject: Re: ITP: pine (?) Re

Re: ITP: pine (?)

1999-11-03 Thread Santiago Vila
On Tue, 2 Nov 1999, Piotr Roszatycki wrote: > Could anybody explain pine licence? What exactly do you want to see explained? > Redistribution of this release is permitted as follows, or by mutual > agreement: [...] I understand this in the sense that "this release" is the (unmodified) version b

Re: ITP: pine (?)

1999-11-03 Thread Piotr Roszatycki
On Wed, 3 Nov 1999, Santiago Vila wrote: > What exactly do you want to see explained? > > > Redistribution of this release is permitted as follows, or by mutual > > agreement: [...] > > I understand this in the sense that "this release" is the (unmodified) > version by UW. This licence doesn't f

Re: ITP: pine (?)

1999-11-03 Thread Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho
On Wed, Nov 03, 1999 at 12:30:39PM +0100, Piotr Roszatycki wrote: > This licence doesn't forbid to redistribute modified binaries. This is irrelevant. The important thing is that it does not explicitly allow redistribution of modified binaries. > "This release" could be modified release, IMHO.

Re: ITP: pine (?)

1999-11-03 Thread Henning Makholm
Piotr Roszatycki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > The license doesn't tell about modified binaries, And therefore they are not allowed. An author has exclusive rights to do just about everything with his work unless he *explicitly* allows others to do it. -- Henning Makholm