On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 7:15 AM, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 01:06:25PM +0100, Francesco Poli a écrit :
>>
>> I am convinced that even CC-by-v3.0 and CC-by-sa-v3.0 licenses *fail* to
>> meet the DFSG).
>
> By the way, is it recorded somewhere, what are the exact changes that ma
Le Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 01:06:25PM +0100, Francesco Poli a écrit :
>
> I am convinced that even CC-by-v3.0 and CC-by-sa-v3.0 licenses *fail* to
> meet the DFSG).
By the way, is it recorded somewhere, what are the exact changes that made v3.0
acceptable, while v2.5 was not ?
Have a nice day,
--
On Tue, 13 Dec 2011 00:26:09 +0100 Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> So, to turn this into something even more useful: is there anyone
> willing to keep an eye on the CC process on behalf of Debian?
>
> The ideal candidate should be a license geek in agreement with the
> current position of the Debian
Stefano Zacchiroli dijo [Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 12:26:09AM +0100]:
> > I hope Debian folks (especially ftpmasters) will be willing to
> > subscribe to the cc-licenses list and help ensure that the CC 4.0
> > licenses will be suitable for Debian.
> (...)
> So, to turn this into something even more use
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 07:12:19AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> I think we need to ensure that the version 4.0 licenses do not regress
> in their acceptability for Debian.
Agreed.
> I hope Debian folks (especially ftpmasters) will be willing to
> subscribe to the cc-licenses list and help ensure tha
Hi all,
This mail is to advise you that the process for creating the 4.0
versions of the Creative Commons licenses has started:
https://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/30676
https://lwn.net/Articles/471803/
I think we need to ensure that the version 4.0 licenses do not regress
in their acceptab
* Mike Hommey ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060523 12:23]:
> Do they distribute the binary version freely or is it that the binary
binary is free for download.
Cheers,
Andi
--
http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble?
On Tue, 23 May 2006, Ciuca, Josephine wrote:
> I just wanted to let you know about a GPL violation in the
> distribution miniVDR, a distribution based on Depian with so-called
> GPL licensed patches (www.minivdr.de). They refuse to share the
> sources and are willing to give them only for 15euros,
* Ciuca, Josephine ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> I just wanted to let you know about a GPL violation in the distribution
> miniVDR, a distribution based on Depian with so-called GPL licensed
> patches (www.minivdr.de). They refuse to share the sources and are
> willing to give them only for 15euros,
On Tue, May 23, 2006 at 11:33:15AM +0100, Floris Bruynooghe wrote:
> Hi Josephine
>
> On Tue, May 23, 2006 at 10:43:40AM +0200, Ciuca, Josephine wrote:
> > Hello
> >
> > I just wanted to let you know about a GPL violation in the distribution
> > miniVDR, a distribution based on Depian with so-cal
On Tue, May 23, 2006 at 01:35:03PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> will be public) or the FSF's violation address (private AIUI)
> for review, to let those who can act decide what to do about it?
Your understanding is correct - the FSF doesn't publish information sent
to their licensing issues address by
"Ciuca, Josephine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> only get the sources for 15eur and if I think it's expensive, I should
> use other distribution. This is abusive usage of the GPL code. Please
> let me know if I should forward these mails too or if you need anything.
http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/g
On Tue, May 23, 2006 at 12:02:04PM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Tue, May 23, 2006 at 10:43:40AM +0200, Ciuca, Josephine <[EMAIL
> PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hello
> >
> > I just wanted to let you know about a GPL violation in the distribution
> > miniVDR, a distribution based on Depian with so-call
Hi Josephine
On Tue, May 23, 2006 at 10:43:40AM +0200, Ciuca, Josephine wrote:
> Hello
>
> I just wanted to let you know about a GPL violation in the distribution
> miniVDR, a distribution based on Depian with so-called GPL licensed
> patches (www.minivdr.de). They refuse to share the sources and
On Tue, May 23, 2006 at 10:43:40AM +0200, Ciuca, Josephine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Hello
>
> I just wanted to let you know about a GPL violation in the distribution
> miniVDR, a distribution based on Depian with so-called GPL licensed
> patches (www.minivdr.de). They refuse to share the sour
Title: Debian-based miniVDR violates GPL (FYI)
Hello
I just wanted to let you know about a GPL violation in the distribution miniVDR, a distribution based on Depian with so-called GPL licensed patches (www.minivdr.de). They refuse to share the sources and are willing to give them only for
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 20-06-2005 19:01, Enrico Zini wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2005 at 11:26:27AM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
>
>
>>it; at the moment, we're swamped with users, people wanting to
>>contribute, people wanting to change stuff, etc. - and this has made
>>some
On Mon, Jun 20, 2005 at 11:26:27AM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> it; at the moment, we're swamped with users, people wanting to
> contribute, people wanting to change stuff, etc. - and this has made
> some of us defensive, erecting barriers to the world so that work can
> get done without being inte
Ian Jackson dijo [Mon, Jun 20, 2005 at 11:26:27AM +0100]:
> I think Ubuntu is a good thing for Debian precisely because it will
> take away some of Debian's users. Debian's open structure works
> better when it has somewhat less of everyone's attention focused on
> (...)
A very sane and well-spok
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 20-06-2005 12:26, Ian Jackson wrote:
> I think Ubuntu is a good thing for Debian precisely because it will
> take away some of Debian's users.
Sounds sane to me. Good luck!
- Jonas
- --
* Jonas Smedegaard - idealist og Internet-arkitekt
* Tlf.
Ian Jackson wrote:
I thought I should let you know, so that you hear it from me: I have
accepted a job with Canonical, working on Ubuntu.
Congratulations :-)
Have fun, Phil.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
I thought I should let you know, so that you hear it from me: I have
accepted a job with Canonical, working on Ubuntu.
This shouldn't significantly affect my Debian packages or my
participation on the Technical Committee (although the last week or so
has been quite hectic and I have neglected to
To Whom It May Concern:
FYI
RE: false advertisement
The following information was submitted to “Tripadvisor” on 7/11/2003
INFORMATION: Alexander's RV rentals promises customer service and
satisfaction, maintained motor homes and thorough orientation of the motor
Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> They're not bletcherous... they more clearly indicate if something is an
> external part of a message, and it's easier to save them to a local file,
> and you don't have to edit the file afterwards to remove the rest of the
> e-mail.
Actually, it's easier
On Tue, Oct 30, 2001 at 06:35:17PM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
> What's wrong with, say, attaching a patch, or a script log?
Well, it's not necessary to use an attachment in either of those
cases; patch(1) is perfectly capable of ignoring email headers and
footers, and script logs are usually for h
On Tue, Oct 30, 2001 at 12:32:50 +0100, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> [please Cc: me on replies, I'm not subscribed to -project]
Please include an appropriate Mail-Followup-To header in your messages then.
> Why only avoid large attachments? Avoid them at all:
Why? Every mail client worth its salt h
On Tue, Oct 30, 2001 at 09:48:52AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> > What's wrong with, say, attaching a patch, or a script log? Especially on
> > the list like debian-user and debian-testing, where these things are often
> > necessary to be able to diagnose a problem.
>
> You can include the
Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> What's wrong with, say, attaching a patch, or a script log? Especially on
> the list like debian-user and debian-testing, where these things are often
> necessary to be able to diagnose a problem.
You can include them in email without using bletcherous at
* Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2001-10-30 18:35]:
> What's wrong with, say, attaching a patch, or a script log? Especially on
> the list like debian-user and debian-testing, where these things are often
> necessary to be able to diagnose a problem.
You are right, of course... Well, it was ju
On Tue, Oct 30, 2001 at 12:32:50PM +0100, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> >When using the Debian mailing lists, please follow these rules:
> >
> > * Never send your messages in HTML; use plain text instead. Avoid large
> >attachments.
>
> Why only avoid large attachments? Avoid them at
[please Cc: me on replies, I'm not subscribed to -project]
* Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2001-10-30 12:25]:
> Code of conduct
>
>When using the Debian mailing lists, please follow these rules:
>
> * Never send your messages in HTML; use plain text instead. Avoid large
>atta
On Tue, Oct 30, 2001 at 02:01:07AM -0800, Debian WWW CVS wrote:
> CVSROOT: /cvs/webwml
> Module name: webwml
> Changes by: joy 01/10/30 02:01:07
>
> Modified files:
> english/MailingLists: index.wml
>
> Log message:
> copied the code of conduct from the Debian FAQ to this
32 matches
Mail list logo
