Hi Martin;
Am Montag, 16. Mai 2011, um 22:09:29 schrieb Martin Hejl:
> Hi kp,
>
> > I'm not aware that any docbook content has been written with a special
> > license in mind. Is it necessary to ask the original authors
> > individually?
>
> I don't know if it's required, but just to be sure: fe
Hi Martin
on 16.05.2011 22:09, Martin Hejl wrote:
...
>
> * Reasonable to me means not placing any unneeded burden on the person
> wishing to use the documentation. As far as I'm concerned, anybody can
> use the docs I've written for anything they wish, as long as they don't
> use it for anyth
Hi kp,
> I'm not aware that any docbook content has been written with a special license
> in mind. Is it necessary to ask the original authors individually?
I don't know if it's required, but just to be sure: feel free to publish
any documentation I have written under any reasonable* license
(CC
On Sun, 2011-05-15 at 16:17 -0700, Mike Noyes wrote:
> On Sun, 2011-05-15 at 22:48 +0200, KP Kirchdoerfer wrote:
> > Am Sonntag, 15. Mai 2011, um 22:02:45 schrieb Mike Noyes:
> > > On Sun, 2011-05-15 at 21:45 +0200, KP Kirchdoerfer wrote:
> > > > Am Sonntag, 15. Mai 2011, um 15:08:12 schrieb davidM
On Sun, 2011-05-15 at 22:48 +0200, KP Kirchdoerfer wrote:
> Am Sonntag, 15. Mai 2011, um 22:02:45 schrieb Mike Noyes:
> > On Sun, 2011-05-15 at 21:45 +0200, KP Kirchdoerfer wrote:
> > > Am Sonntag, 15. Mai 2011, um 15:08:12 schrieb davidMbrooke:
> > -snip-
> >
> > > > > > With specific reference t
Am Sonntag, 15. Mai 2011, um 22:02:45 schrieb Mike Noyes:
> On Sun, 2011-05-15 at 21:45 +0200, KP Kirchdoerfer wrote:
> > Am Sonntag, 15. Mai 2011, um 15:08:12 schrieb davidMbrooke:
> -snip-
>
> > > > > With specific reference to the Wiki, there is currently no
> > > > > statement about the licens
On Sun, 2011-05-15 at 21:45 +0200, KP Kirchdoerfer wrote:
> Am Sonntag, 15. Mai 2011, um 15:08:12 schrieb davidMbrooke:
-snip-
> > > > With specific reference to the Wiki, there is currently no statement
> > > > about the license which applies to the Wiki text itself. For my own
> > > > contributio
Hi;
Am Sonntag, 15. Mai 2011, um 15:08:12 schrieb davidMbrooke:
> > > In my professional life I have recently been researching the terms of
> > > the various Open Source licenses and I'm thinking that we should do
> > > more to clarify the license(s) which apply to LEAF releases, in
> > > particul
On Sun, 2011-05-15 at 14:08 +0100, davidMbrooke wrote:
> On Sun, 2011-05-15 at 01:06 +0200, KP Kirchdoerfer wrote:
-snip-
> > > My thoughts:
> > >- Shouldn't we include a copy of the GPL in all of the disk images,
> > > because the GPL says that every user "...should have received a copy of
> >
On Sun, 2011-05-15 at 01:06 +0200, KP Kirchdoerfer wrote:
> Hi David;
> I've been afraid that some day this discussion will come up on the list :)
KP & David,
There have been many license discussions on leaf-devel. Also, see our SF
Trove for current licenses.
http://www.mail-archive.com/search?q=
Hi kp,
On Sun, 2011-05-15 at 01:06 +0200, KP Kirchdoerfer wrote:
> Hi David;
>
> I've been afraid that some day this discussion will come up on the list :)
Sorry about that... :-)
>
> Am Freitag, 13. Mai 2011, um 20:31:58 schrieb davidMbrooke:
> > Hi,
> >
> > In my professional life I have rece
Hi David;
I've been afraid that some day this discussion will come up on the list :)
Am Freitag, 13. Mai 2011, um 20:31:58 schrieb davidMbrooke:
> Hi,
>
> In my professional life I have recently been researching the terms of
> the various Open Source licenses and I'm thinking that we should do m
Hi,
In my professional life I have recently been researching the terms of
the various Open Source licenses and I'm thinking that we should do more
to clarify the license(s) which apply to LEAF releases, in particular
Bering-uClibc 4.0.
Obviously we mostly inherit licenses from the upstream source
13 matches
Mail list logo
