> The simple fact is that Tuomo has some strange desire to blame packagers
> for all his problems with software and users.
Yes, license-crafting lawyers are usually more polite and don't engage in
direct communications with forums such as ours. Their licenses suck much
more, however -- think Jav
Mikhail Teterin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > The simple fact is that Tuomo has some strange desire to blame packagers
> > for all his problems with software and users.
>
> Yes, license-crafting lawyers are usually more polite and don't engage in
> direct communications with forums such as our
On 2007-12-12, Bill Moran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There are far too many quality hackers out there who _do_ care about the
> community to tolerate one who seems to be in conflict with his community.
Since when have I been part of some purported "community"? There's
just me, a handful of othe
On Wed, Dec 12, 2007 at 11:42:31PM +, Tuomo Valkonen wrote:
> Since when have I been part of some purported "community"? There's
> just me, a handful of other people with some traces of sanity, and
See, that's the problem! Only some traces of sanity left in there...
I'll spell it out in litt
середа 12 грудень 2007 06:35 по, Bill Moran Ви написали:
> It's his software. If his requirements can't be met, then the port comes
> out of the tree. What else do you expect to happen?
I expect the port-removal to be initiated/done in an orderly fashion. This
includes marking it FORBIDDEN (or
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Mikhail Teterin wrote:
> середа 12 грудень 2007 06:35 по, Bill Moran Ви написали:
>> It's his software. If his requirements can't be met, then the
>> port comes out of the tree. What else do you expect to happen?
>
> I expect the port-removal to be i
Mikhail Teterin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> середа 12 грудень 2007 06:35 по, Bill Moran Ви написали:
> > It's his software. If his requirements can't be met, then the port comes
> > out of the tree. What else do you expect to happen?
>
> I expect the port-removal to be initiated/done in an or
On Wednesday 12 December 2007, Mikhail Teterin said:
> > The simple fact is that Tuomo has some strange desire to blame
> > packagers for all his problems with software and users.
>
> Yes, license-crafting lawyers are usually more polite and don't
> engage in direct communications with forums such
On Wed, Dec 12, 2007 at 08:12:17PM -0600, Mark Linimon wrote:
> http://mail-index.netbsd.org/tech-pkg/2007/10/28/.html
>
> Anyone interested in this thread needs to go read that one first.
As well as http://www.archlinux.org/pipermail/tur-users/2007-April/004634.html,
which contains the histo
On Wed, Dec 12, 2007 at 07:56:13PM -0500, Bill Moran wrote:
> Mikhail Teterin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > 12 ?? 2007 06:35 , Bill Moran
> > :
> > > It's his software. ??If his requirements can't be met, then the port comes
> > > out of the t
On Wed, Dec 12, 2007 at 07:30:46PM -0500, Mikhail Teterin wrote:
> I expect the port-removal to be initiated/done in an orderly fashion.
Claims of license violations absolutely trump any "process requirements".
portmgr has the explicit task of keeping the Ports Collection in as
best a legal state
On Wednesday 12 December 2007 23:01:57 Mikhail Teterin wrote:
> > The simple fact is that Tuomo has some strange desire to blame packagers
> > for all his problems with software and users.
>
> Yes, license-crafting lawyers are usually more polite and don't engage in
> direct communications with for
It was pulled from Debian, as well:
http://packages.qa.debian.org/i/ion3/news/20070310T233909Z.html
As far as I'm concerned, the matter is closed. When 4 different* OS groups
come to the same conclusion, I think there's not much else to say.
mcl
* pkgsrc, ArchLinux, Debian, and now FreeBSD
___
- Original Message -
From: "Mark Linimon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Wed, Dec 12, 2007 at 08:12:17PM -0600, Mark Linimon wrote:
http://mail-index.netbsd.org/tech-pkg/2007/10/28/.html
Anyone interested in this thread needs to go read that one first.
As well as http://www.archlinux.o
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> an't do OSS and be a control freak at the same time. It just
> doesn't work like that. mlc has handled this exactly how he should
> have. With a swagger!
Recent experiences have shown me that this is not necessarly true...
usually the control freak
середа 12 грудень 2007 09:49 по, Mark Linimon Ви написали:
> Further, note that my initial commit tried to do this, and I asked the
> author if it was acceptable. It was clear from his reply that it was
> not -- especially considering the following history:
>
> http://mail-index.netbsd.org/tech-pk
On 2007-12-13, Mark Linimon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Further, note that my initial commit tried to do this, and I asked the
> author if it was acceptable. It was clear from his reply that it was
> not -- especially considering the following history:
It seemed acceptable wrt. the source packag
On Thu, Dec 13, 2007 at 07:43:36AM +, Tuomo Valkonen wrote:
> On 2007-12-13, Mark Linimon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Further, note that my initial commit tried to do this, and I asked the
> > author if it was acceptable. It was clear from his reply that it was
> > not -- especially conside
On 2007-12-12, Danny Pansters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The guy was never trying to find any compromise.
What compromise can be had, when the distros never try to be
constructive?
> Also, it's worth noting that there seems to be no trademark at all, the
> author is under the impression that a
On 2007-12-13, Mark Linimon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Even without the Xinerama code, I don't see how we could have met your
> 'no modifications' clause and still have ion-3 be able to run on FreeBSD.
> In fact, I don't see how any packaging system can meet that standard.
> Perhaps you can tell
On Thu, Dec 13, 2007 at 08:30:06AM +, Tuomo Valkonen wrote:
> The copyright holder reserves the right to refine the definition of
> significant changes on a per-case basis.
In other words, a moving target -- which implies, to me, that to be
legally in the clear, that we would first have to ve
On 2007-12-13, Mark Linimon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 13, 2007 at 08:30:06AM +, Tuomo Valkonen wrote:
>> The copyright holder reserves the right to refine the definition of
>> significant changes on a per-case basis.
>
> In other words, a moving target -- which implies, to me, t
On Thu, Dec 13, 2007 at 10:17:16AM +, Tuomo Valkonen wrote:
> Notice the "a priori": it means you're allowed to do that without legal
> threat until further notice to the contrary.
Minutiae like this are the reason I pursued engineering, not law.
mcl
__
Tuomo Valkonen wrote:
> On 2007-12-12, Danny Pansters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> The guy was never trying to find any compromise.
>
> What compromise can be had, when the distros never try to be
> constructive?
Given that as your perspective (which you are of course entitled to),
and given th
On Wed, Dec 12, 2007 at 10:31:10PM -0500, Mikhail Teterin wrote:
>Maybe, their "pissed-off threshold" is just greater, and they were able to get
>through his fireworks without losing the sight of /their users/, who continue
>to like the software, however frustrating the author's fits...
It's not
On четвер 13 грудень 2007, Peter Jeremy wrote:
= So far one person has stated that they tried and gave
= up. Maybe the next person will be more successful.
Absolutely right. My point, however, was that the rashed removal makes that
hypothetical next person's job more difficult.
No, not impossib
In response to Tuomo Valkonen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On 2007-12-13, Mark Linimon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 13, 2007 at 08:30:06AM +, Tuomo Valkonen wrote:
> >> The copyright holder reserves the right to refine the definition of
> >> significant changes on a per-case basis.
>
On 2007-12-13, Bill Moran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Did you not understand the part where Mark described the requirement to
> avoid possible legal trouble?
Which part of my reply did you not understand?
And at least where I come from, contracts are legally enforceable,
even if they're only
In response to Mikhail Teterin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On четвер 13 грудень 2007, Peter Jeremy wrote:
> = So far one person has stated that they tried and gave
> = up. Maybe the next person will be more successful.
>
> Absolutely right. My point, however, was that the rashed removal makes that
>
On Thu, Dec 13, 2007 at 02:43:07PM +, Tuomo Valkonen wrote:
> And at least where I come from, contracts are legally enforceable,
> even if they're only oral ones
You clearly don't come from the US, where oral contracts are not
germane in business law. What's written down in the license is th
In response to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark Linimon):
> On Thu, Dec 13, 2007 at 02:43:07PM +, Tuomo Valkonen wrote:
> > And at least where I come from, contracts are legally enforceable,
> > even if they're only oral ones
>
> You clearly don't come from the US, where oral contracts are not
> germ
--On Thursday, December 13, 2007 10:17:16 + Tuomo Valkonen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 2007-12-13, Mark Linimon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, Dec 13, 2007 at 08:30:06AM +, Tuomo Valkonen wrote:
The copyright holder reserves the right to refine the definition of
significant chan
On 2007-12-13, Bill Moran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I had a lawyer tell me exactly what you said: That verbal agreements
> _are_ legally binding, but almost never enforceable.
That may be because typical verbal agreements are difficult to prove.
However, a statement on, say, a public mailing
On 2007-12-13, Paul Schmehl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The license is what is is, unless and until I say it's not. Therefore, you
> can use it, for now, but you need to pay close attention because I might
> change it at some point in the future and *then* you will be liable.
Well, I suppose t
On Thu, Dec 13, 2007 at 09:23:24AM -0500, Mikhail Teterin wrote:
> No, not impossible -- getting stuff out from the Attic is doable. But more
> difficult (possibly involving contacting repo-meisters, etc.)
Wrong. You do cvs add, cvs com.
> Any claims of license violations -- which, according to
35 matches
Mail list logo
