Le Sun, Jan 06, 2013 at 06:26:26PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli a écrit :
5) demote the obligation that, when using the trademarks for commercial
purposes, one should advertise how much of the price will be donated
to the Debian Project. It is now a recommendation only
Thanks a lot,
On Mon, Jan 07, 2013 at 09:39:20PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
Thanks a lot, Stefano, for this change. I think that it will strenghen our
position when asking to relax license clauses restricting commercial use for
some software we distribute or would like to distibute.
Thanks for your
Stefano Zacchiroli lea...@debian.org wrote:
Hold on :-) All you're discussing here already exists. FTP masters vet
software that enters the archive, de facto deciding whether the
associated licenses are DFSG free or not.
Actually, don't they decide whether the *software* follows the DFSG?
Stefano Zacchiroli writes (Re: Validity of DFSG #10):
This has been discussed in various occasions. A recent one within the
project is the question time of my talk at DebConf12 [1], thanks to
input by Steve Langasek. But our flaws on this matter are being
discussed also outside the project
Le Mon, Jan 07, 2013 at 01:32:20PM +, MJ Ray a écrit :
Stefano Zacchiroli lea...@debian.org wrote:
I didn't want to imply that we should change anything of that. We
should rather consolidate the work they do and index licenses,
decisions, and rationales for such decisions in a central
On 13083 March 1977, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
Unfortunately, we are not doing a particularly good job at documenting
our choices --- in particular: which licenses do we consider free ---
and at explaining the rationales behind them.
One thing first: The question if we change DFSG and
6 matches
Mail list logo
