Hi!
What's wrong with google's own repository?
Repository Contents
* Picasa for Linux 2.7
* Google Desktop Linux 1.2
No Google Earth in there.
--
Richard
2009/4/25 Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski :
> On Wednesday, 22 April 2009 at 09:25, Hans de Goede wrote:
>> On 04/22/2009 12:52 AM, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
>> >2009/4/22 Orion Poplawski:
>> >>Would Google Earth be acceptable as a rpmfusion package?
&g
What's wrong with google's own repository?
http://www.google.com/linuxrepositories/yum.html
-Chris
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On Wednesday, 22 April 2009 at 09:25, Hans de Goede wrote:
> On 04/22/2009 12:52 AM, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
> >2009/4/22 Orion Poplawski:
> >>Would Google Earth be acceptable as a rpmfusion package?
> >Probably not as it need to be at least redistributable.
> >Y
On 04/22/2009 12:52 AM, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
2009/4/22 Orion Poplawski:
Would Google Earth be acceptable as a rpmfusion package?
Probably not as it need to be at least redistributable.
You can still ask google for an eventual agreement for rpmfusion to
redistribute googleearth,
Ack,
If
On 4/21/09 6:01 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote:
Would Google Earth be acceptable as a rpmfusion package?
Among other sections, this section of licensing is a bit tricky:
"1. USE OF SOFTWARE; RESTRICTIONS
Use of Software. For an individual end user, the Software is made available
to and may be
2009/4/22 Orion Poplawski :
> Would Google Earth be acceptable as a rpmfusion package?
Probably not as it need to be at least redistributable.
You can still ask google for an eventual agreement for rpmfusion to
redistribute googleearth,
I haven't the GoogleEarth license in mind.
Last t
Would Google Earth be acceptable as a rpmfusion package?
--
Orion Poplawski
Technical Manager 303-415-9701 x222
NWRA/CoRA DivisionFAX: 303-415-9702
3380 Mitchell Lane or...@cora.nwra.com
Boulder, CO 80301 http
