On Sat, 07 Jul 2012 01:41:26 +0200, HB-GRAL wrote in message
<4ff777a6.5070...@sablonier.ch>:
> Am 05.07.12 18:04, schrieb Curtis Olson:
>
> >
> >
> > We !!!STRONGLY!!! encourage authors to use the GPL so that we can
> > incorporate their work into the overall project and distribute the
> > work
Am 05.07.12 18:04, schrieb Curtis Olson:
>
>
> We !!!STRONGLY!!! encourage authors to use the GPL so that we can
> incorporate their work into the overall project and distribute the work
http://git.fgx.ch/flightgear/commit/?h=next&id=b14ddd40110e271efcd1416e9bf15d48d99c3123
Cheers, Yves
---
Ok, I see, just my misunderstanding of Gijs post when I read all other
posts now ... I guess one of the best explanation comes from Brandano here.
Sorry for the noise, I hate to participate in another license
discussion. (I hate myself for this, not you.) ;-)
-Yves
Am 06.07.12 21:34, schrieb H
Am 06.07.12 10:10, schrieb Gijs de Rooy:
> Nothing stops you from releasing that scenery under whatever license you'd
> like ( within the legal constraints ofourse), we just cannot include it in
> the official scenery.
>
No. Official scenery can also incorporate resources with other licenses:
ht
On Fri, 6 Jul 2012 00:26:48 -0700 (PDT), Michael wrote in message
<1341559608.65675.yahoomailclas...@web140205.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>:
> My last comment to this subject.
> I've got permission to distribute some swiss sceneries as GPL but
> only after asking back. Obviously I had to, as the author s
t_h...@yahoo.com
> To: flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] scenery licence for 2.8 and later
>
> My last comment to this subject.
> I've got permission to distribute some swiss sceneries as GPL but only after
> asking back. Obviously I had t
om: scrat_h...@yahoo.com
> To: flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] scenery licence for 2.8 and later
>
> My last comment to this subject.
> I've got permission to distribute some swiss sceneries as GPL but only after
> asking back. Obvi
My last comment to this subject.
I've got permission to distribute some swiss sceneries as GPL but only after
asking back. Obviously I had to, as the author said first that it needs to
remain Freeware.-
Now that's only possible because he bent back a little. But many
won't or can't do and hence
Curtis Olson wrote:
> [...] or scenery GPL? :-)
Who cares about Scenery >;-)
Martin.
--
Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are !
--
--
On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 1:50 PM, Curtis Olson wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 1:42 PM, Martin Spott wrote:
>
>> Hi Curt,
>>
>> Curtis Olson wrote:
>>
>> > We !!!STRONGLY!!! encourage authors to use the GPL [...]
>>
>> except from SimGear, which is supposed to be LGPL, correct ?
>>
>
> Yes.
On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 1:42 PM, Martin Spott wrote:
> Hi Curt,
>
> Curtis Olson wrote:
>
> > We !!!STRONGLY!!! encourage authors to use the GPL [...]
>
> except from SimGear, which is supposed to be LGPL, correct ?
>
Yes. :-)
Curt.
--
Curtis Olson:
http://www.atiak.com - http://aem.umn.e
Hi Curt,
Curtis Olson wrote:
> We !!!STRONGLY!!! encourage authors to use the GPL [...]
except from SimGear, which is supposed to be LGPL, correct ?
Cheers,
Martin.
--
Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are !
-
On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 10:36 AM, Stefan Seifert wrote:
> On Thursday 05 July 2012 07:50:20 Michael wrote:
>
> > Everything on GPL only means:
> > - less scenery and airplanes included ( wasn't there recently some
> > photoscenery rejected because of the GPL?)
>
> There are already 565 airplanes to
On Thursday 05 July 2012 07:50:20 Michael wrote:
> Everything on GPL only means:
> - less scenery and airplanes included ( wasn't there recently some
> photoscenery rejected because of the GPL?)
There are already 565 airplanes to choose from in git (all licensed GPL). More
than enough for me, if
>
> And Keep It Stupid Simple (tm). One license is already too
> many licenses.
>
Everything on GPL only means:
- less scenery and airplanes included ( wasn't there recently some photoscenery
rejected because of the GPL?)
- authors lose copyrights
- only to find their work rebranded and sold f
Le 04/07/2012 14:27, Erik Hofman a écrit :
> On 07/04/2012 01:12 PM, Michael wrote:
>> No, I mean authors could leave as is or use any licence they want.
>>
>>-- But it doesn't need to be GPL. --
>>
>> Sorry, GPL is ok for code but feels like a lead-foot for everything else.The
> The only optio
On 07/04/2012 01:12 PM, Michael wrote:
> No, I mean authors could leave as is or use any licence they want.
>
> -- But it doesn't need to be GPL. --
>
> Sorry, GPL is ok for code but feels like a lead-foot for everything else.The
The only option would be a less restrictive license (which you pro
No, I mean authors could leave as is or use any licence they want.
-- But it doesn't need to be GPL. --
Sorry, GPL is ok for code but feels like a lead-foot for everything else.
--
Live Security Virtual Conference
Ex
On 4 July 2012 19:45, Erik Hofman wrote:
> On 07/04/2012 11:26 AM, Michael wrote:
>> Hi
>> is it possible to have different licences than GPL for sceneries etc.?
>> Now that would help fight piracy, while keeping GPL for the source code.
>
> No and no.
>
Correct form my understanding.
If someone
On 07/04/2012 11:26 AM, Michael wrote:
> Hi
> is it possible to have different licences than GPL for sceneries etc.?
> Now that would help fight piracy, while keeping GPL for the source code.
No and no.
Erik
--
http://www.adalin.com - Hardware accelerated AeonWave, OpenAL for Linux
-
Hi
is it possible to have different licences than GPL for sceneries etc.?
Now that would help fight piracy, while keeping GPL for the source code.
Thanks for the info
Michael
--
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive
21 matches
Mail list logo
