AFAIK (please correct me) Uruguay is not providing code, thus in
violation of GNU license, and this situation has not been solved after
several years.
With GPL 3 will the Uruguay security code be considered a System Library
and thus exempt from providing code? That might be an elegant way out
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 8:52 PM, Yamandu Ploskonka wrote:
> AFAIK (please correct me) Uruguay is not providing code, thus in violation
> of GNU license, and this situation has not been solved after several years.
This is a serious accusation. Can you please provide some backup?
Specific to Sugar?
A, Walter, plz google sugar uruguay gpl compliant
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
my apologies, that didn t work. Ill see in my other computer
2011/4/20, Yama Ploskonka :
> A, Walter, plz google sugar uruguay gpl compliant
>
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarl
Hi,
On Wed, Apr 20 2011, Yamandu Ploskonka wrote:
> AFAIK (please correct me) Uruguay is not providing code, thus in
> violation of GNU license, and this situation has not been solved after
> several years.
Which code are you talking about?
> With GPL 3 will the Uruguay security code be consider
On Wed, 2011-04-20 at 21:05 -0400, Walter Bender wrote:
> > BTW, and regarding that, what's the point of having a license if such clear
> > violation just go like that forever? we all know that the desire that kids
> > would do stuff with source just hasn't happened so much (I agree with Martin
>
On 04/20/2011 08:05 PM, Walter Bender wrote:
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 8:52 PM, Yamandu Ploskonka wrote:
AFAIK (please correct me) Uruguay is not providing code, thus in violation
of GNU license, and this situation has not been solved after several years.
This is a serious accusation. Can you
The excuse I was given by people who believe know more about this than I
do is that code (source code) was not released because of security
concerns - prevent stolen laptops, etc.
If you are correct that their code is plainly visible in the images, and
those can be seen en clair, then I agree
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 11:15 PM, Yamandu Ploskonka wrote:
>
>
> On 04/20/2011 08:05 PM, Walter Bender wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 8:52 PM, Yamandu Ploskonka
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> AFAIK (please correct me) Uruguay is not providing code, thus in
>>> violation
>>> of GNU license, and this situ
