On Mon, 2022-11-28 at 18:22 +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>
> Simon, what do you think about emailing the authors of the “10 years of
> stories” post asking if they agree with the licensing? :-) No rush,
> though the sooner the more likely we are to get an answer.
>
> Ludo’.
>
> ¹
Hello everyone,
Sorry for the late reply, but as I've been asked by Simon to provide a public
answer I managed to retrieve this message to reply that I do agree with the new
licensing of CC-BY-SA 4.0 and GFDL 1.3 for my contribution to the "10 years of
stories" : )
Have a nice day folks,
Alice
Yes, I agree for my contribution to the blog posts to be published under
the licenses CC-BY-SA 4.0 and GFDL version 1.3 or later (with no
Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts).
Hello,
I agree for my contribution to the blog posts with the license under
CC-BY-SA 4.0 and GFDL version 1.3 or later.
Regards,
Cyril Roelandt
Csepp writes:
> I thought I agreed when I sent my part, but in case I haven't:
> I agree to licensing your contribution under CC-BY-SA 4.0 and GFDL
> version 1.3 or later, with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts,
> and no Back-Cover Texts.
s/your/mine/
I copied the text from the
Ludovic Courtès writes:
Hello!
Thanks Simon for pinging me!
> You might remember that I started long ago asking people who had
> contributed to the blog whether they would agree to licensing their work
> under CC-BY-SA 4.0 and GFDL version 1.3 or later, with no Invariant
> Sections, no
On Mon, 28 Nov 2022 18:22:15 +0100
Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Hello Guix!
>
> You might remember that I started long ago asking people who had
> contributed to the blog whether they would agree to licensing their
> work under CC-BY-SA 4.0 and GFDL version 1.3 or later, with no
> Invariant
> Do you agree to licensing your contribution under CC-BY-SA 4.0 and GFDL
> version 1.3 or later, with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and
> no Back-Cover Texts?
Yes, I agree.
publickey - luis.felipe.la@protonmail.com - 0x12DE1598.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys
Hi,
> Simon, what do you think about emailing the authors of the “10 years of
> stories” post asking if they agree with the licensing? :-) No rush,
> though the sooner the more likely we are to get an answer.
I’m also fine with the terms proposed here.
Lars
I thought I agreed when I sent my part, but in case I haven't:
I agree to licensing your contribution under CC-BY-SA 4.0 and GFDL
version 1.3 or later, with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts,
and no Back-Cover Texts.
Hi,
On Fri, 02 Dec 2022 at 17:06, zimoun wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Nov 2022 at 18:22, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>
>> Simon, what do you think about emailing the authors of the “10 years of
>> stories” post asking if they agree with the licensing? :-) No rush,
>> though the sooner the more likely we
Ludovic Courtès skribis:
> You might remember that I started long ago asking people who had
> contributed to the blog whether they would agree to licensing their work
> under CC-BY-SA 4.0 and GFDL version 1.3 or later, with no Invariant
> Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts¹.
Hello,
On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 06:22 PM, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Hello Guix!
>
> You might remember that I started long ago asking people who had
> contributed to the blog whether they would agree to licensing their work
> under CC-BY-SA 4.0 and GFDL version 1.3 or later, with no Invariant
>
Hello Ludo,
Ludovic Courtès writes:
> You might remember that I started long ago asking people who had
> contributed to the blog whether they would agree to licensing their work
> under CC-BY-SA 4.0 and GFDL version 1.3 or later, with no Invariant
> Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no
Hi Ludo,
Thanks for this clarification. It reminds me hpc.guix.info posts. :-)
On Mon, 28 Nov 2022 at 18:22, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Simon, what do you think about emailing the authors of the “10 years of
> stories” post asking if they agree with the licensing? :-) No rush,
> though the
Hi!
Ludovic Courtès skribis:
> Therefore, I propose to apply the following patch, which leaves out a
> couple of posts as “unlicensed”. From there on, we’ll have consistent
> free licensing by default.
Thanks to everyone who provided feedback. I pushed the patch.
Let’s see if we can
Ludovic Courtès writes:
> Therefore, I propose to apply the following patch, which leaves out a
Yes! The patch looks good. I‘m fine with that license.
Regards,
Florian
On 2022-11-28, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> You might remember that I started long ago asking people who had
> contributed to the blog whether they would agree to licensing their work
> under CC-BY-SA 4.0 and GFDL version 1.3 or later, with no Invariant
> Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no
Am Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 06:22:15PM +0100 schrieb Ludovic Courtès:
> contributed to the blog whether they would agree to licensing their work
> under CC-BY-SA 4.0 and GFDL version 1.3 or later, with no Invariant
> Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts¹.
>
> Simon, what do you
Hi,
Ludovic Courtès writes:
> Hello Guix!
>
> You might remember that I started long ago asking people who had
> contributed to the blog whether they would agree to licensing their work
> under CC-BY-SA 4.0 and GFDL version 1.3 or later, with no Invariant
> Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and
Hi,
>
> Simon, what do you think about emailing the authors of the “10 years of
> stories” post asking if they agree with the licensing? :-) No rush,
> though the sooner the more likely we are to get an answer.
I'm one of them.
You can use what I wrote with the license you prefer.
Consider it
Hello Guix!
You might remember that I started long ago asking people who had
contributed to the blog whether they would agree to licensing their work
under CC-BY-SA 4.0 and GFDL version 1.3 or later, with no Invariant
Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts¹.
I did not get
22 matches
Mail list logo
