Hi!
> Jens Ritter writes:
>> [...] You may not charge a fee for the OC itself.
JR> ^^
JR> As I understand it, GPL does not put this restriction on the
JR> content it licenses.
That's one of the points I missed. Thanks for reading the fine
pr
Ben Gertzfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[cited from opencontent License]
>1. You may copy and distribute exact replicas of the OpenContent (OC)
>as you receive it, in any medium, provided that you conspicuously and
>appropriately publish on each copy an appropriate copyright notice
Hi!
> Ben Gertzfield writes:
BG> On slashdot.org today, an article about the OpenContent License
BG> (OPL, pronounced 'opal') was posted.
OPL is nice because it is designed to be easy-to-understand.
However, keep in mind that there are a number of people (myself
included) who are using GP
> This is a formal request for removal from the NAG distribution list.
>
> Receiving 100 useless messages, each indicating an outstanding bug, is the
> worst kind of spam. It imparts no information, either about the bugs, or
> any suggested fixes. It only adds useless mail to my inbox, which I mus
I think our ongoing problem of finding an appropriate license for
documentation has been solved.
On slashdot.org today, an article about the OpenContent License (OPL,
pronounced 'opal') was posted.
The license looks perfect for our use. I've included it at the
bottom of this message.
It specifie
Hi,
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >>"Luis" == Luis Francisco Gonzalez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Luis> there is an "oldish" bug report open on tcsh that complains
> Luis> about tcsh not deleting it's own entry from /etc/shells upon
> Luis> removal from the system.
>
> Since that file b
Previously Karl M. Hegbloom wrote:
>When you are installing Debian on 200 basicly identical machines, why
>not install it on one box, then boot the others with a floppy, and
>image the hard drive over an nfs mount? I've heard of a school that
>maintains a room full of Windows PC's like that. When
Hi,
*blush*. How embarrasing. I shall let the original proposer
send a mail to the BTS to this new bug detailing the proposal, with
the current draft.
The woding can still be polished while we wait for a second,
and then again in the discussion period. As ESR said, release earl
manoj writes:
> I formally second this proposal, and bring it in tune with the
> amendment guidelines by filing a wishlist bug. The next person
> seconding this proposal please reply to this message...
I second it. Let's just pass the thing and be done with it. It isn't
important enough to justi
On 21 Sep 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> - ship HTML versions in the binary package, in the directory
> - /usr/doc/package or its subdirectories.
> + ship HTML versions in a binary package, under the directory
> + /usr/doc/ or its subdirectories.
I second this.
It reflects the fact t
On Tue, Sep 22, 1998 at 02:43:28AM +, Joseph Carter wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 21, 1998 at 07:19:21PM -0700, Ben Gertzfield wrote:
> > Joseph> I propose that a new permanent license be given to the
> > Joseph> Debian Logo. While not a final draft certainly, I suggest
> > Joseph> the foll
On Tue, Sep 22, 1998 at 12:26:29AM -0400, Buddha Buck wrote:
> > I formally second this proposal, and bring it in tune with the
> > amendment guidelines by filing a wishlist bug. The next person
> > seconding this proposal please reply to this message; however, I
> > suggest not cluttering u
On Mon, 21 Sep 1998, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
jgg>
jgg>We have rather a bit of a problem.. As it stands it is not possible to
jgg>locate the source tar.gz and .dsc without searching in all cases,
I also sometimes wonder about the fact that, while we encourage
people to look at the source, i
We have rather a bit of a problem.. As it stands it is not possible to
locate the source tar.gz and .dsc without searching in all cases,
Consider the fragment from the package file (below). Notice how this
multi-binary package creates .debs in two sections, it is indeterminate
if the source packa
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I also further stated:
> I was not really suggesting replacing the info documentation
> (or the man pages, for that matter), I meant in addition to. The
> policy *does* say that HTML is our preferred format, so it should
> als
Hi,
I am going through the bug reports against debian-policy, and
I propose handling them one by one. Starting with the oldest bug
report.
A recap:
The following paragraphs are somewhat contradictory:
1) If a pa
> Package: debian-policy
> Version: current
> Severity: wishlist
>
> Hi,
>
> I formally second this proposal, and bring it in tune with the
> amendment guidelines by filing a wishlist bug. The next person
> seconding this proposal please reply to this message; however, I
> suggest not cl
Package: debian-policy
Version: current
Severity: wishlist
Hi,
I formally second this proposal, and bring it in tune with the
amendment guidelines by filing a wishlist bug. The next person
seconding this proposal please reply to this message; however, I
suggest not cluttering up the BT
> "Joseph" == Joseph Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Neale> The temporary logo license expired 21 days ago. I'm not a
Neale> developer so I can't do it, but could someone please write
Neale> up a proposal for a permanent license? This is getting
Neale> ridiculous.
Jos
On Mon, Sep 21, 1998 at 07:19:21PM -0700, Ben Gertzfield wrote:
> Neale> The temporary logo license expired 21 days ago. I'm not a
> Neale> developer so I can't do it, but could someone please write
> Neale> up a proposal for a permanent license? This is getting
> Neale> ridiculou
Ben Gertzfield writes:
> Looks good to me other than those changes.
Same here. Ship it.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Hasler)
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI
> "Joseph" == Joseph Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Joseph> [Please remove debian-devel when replying]
Joseph> On Mon, Sep 21, 1998 at 12:00:30PM -0600, Neale Pickett
Joseph> wrote:
Neale> The temporary logo license expired 21 days ago. I'm not a
Neale> developer so
[Please remove debian-devel when replying]
On Mon, Sep 21, 1998 at 12:00:30PM -0600, Neale Pickett wrote:
> The temporary logo license expired 21 days ago. I'm not a developer so
> I can't do it, but could someone please write up a proposal for a
> permanent license? This is getting ridiculous.
23 matches
Mail list logo
