On Sun, Jun 07, 2015 at 08:45:14PM -0400, Clem Cole wrote:
> I fear you might be missunderstanding/confusing the "usage" rights and the
> "ownership" rights.
Perhaps, yes.
> On Sun, Jun 7, 2015 at 4:00 AM, Pontus Pihlgren wrote:
>
> > If A gives B a software product under GPL then A must pro
Am 07.06.2015 um 05:40 schrieb J. David Bryan:
On Saturday, June 6, 2015 at 21:44, Cory Smelosky wrote:
It seems there's no current SIMH support for the HP 1000 A-series system
(A900, A990, A600 et cetera) meaning RTE-A (with the ARPA/1000 software!)
is unfortunately out.
That's correct.
Lo
On 2015-06-08 09:07, Pontus Pihlgren wrote:
On Sun, Jun 07, 2015 at 08:45:14PM -0400, Clem Cole wrote:
I fear you might be missunderstanding/confusing the "usage" rights and the
"ownership" rights.
Perhaps, yes.
I think the larger difference is that you (Pontus) are talking about if
you m
On Mon, Jun 08, 2015 at 01:24:39PM +0200, Johnny Billquist wrote:
>
> Which is essentially anyone. Since, if you do release it, you cannot
> restrict who can use it.
The point I'm trying to make is that B has no obligation to anyone but
C. If C starts to make the software available no-one can de
On 8 June 2015 at 12:36, Pontus Pihlgren wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 08, 2015 at 01:24:39PM +0200, Johnny Billquist wrote:
>>
>> Which is essentially anyone. Since, if you do release it, you cannot
>> restrict who can use it.
>
> The point I'm trying to make is that B has no obligation to anyone but
> C.
On Mon, Jun 08, 2015 at 12:57:21PM +0100, David Brownlee wrote:
>
> GPLv2 states:
>
> 2b) You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in
> whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any
> part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third
>
On 2015-06-08 13:36, Pontus Pihlgren wrote:
On Mon, Jun 08, 2015 at 01:24:39PM +0200, Johnny Billquist wrote:
Which is essentially anyone. Since, if you do release it, you cannot
restrict who can use it.
The point I'm trying to make is that B has no obligation to anyone but
C. If C starts to
On 2015-06-08 14:09, Pontus Pihlgren wrote:
On Mon, Jun 08, 2015 at 12:57:21PM +0100, David Brownlee wrote:
GPLv2 states:
2b) You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in
whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any
part thereof, to be licensed a
On Mon, Jun 08, 2015 at 03:18:50PM +0200, Johnny Billquist wrote:
> On 2015-06-08 13:36, Pontus Pihlgren wrote:
> >On Mon, Jun 08, 2015 at 01:24:39PM +0200, Johnny Billquist wrote:
> >>
> >>Which is essentially anyone. Since, if you do release it, you cannot
> >>restrict who can use it.
> >
> >The
On Mon, Jun 08, 2015 at 03:24:32PM +0200, Andreas Davour wrote:
>
> How about we pend this discussion until we know if the code in
> question will be relicenced to Bob's satisfaction?
If the list owner tells me to take it off list I will.
/P
___
Simh m
On Mon, Jun 08, 2015 at 03:31:42PM +0200, Pontus Pihlgren wrote:
>
> A little contrived, I know, but I still maintain that C has no claim
> towards A.
I stand corrected:
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#WhatDoesWrittenOfferValid
Sorry guys :) Educational for me at least.
/P
__
On 2015-06-08 15:35, Pontus Pihlgren wrote:
On Mon, Jun 08, 2015 at 03:21:51PM +0200, Johnny Billquist wrote:
Uh... You cannot choose who to distribute it to. That is the whole
point of GPL, and is what puts it apart from just any company
copyright control.
Certainly I can :) at least in the
On Mon, Jun 08, 2015 at 03:21:51PM +0200, Johnny Billquist wrote:
>
> Uh... You cannot choose who to distribute it to. That is the whole
> point of GPL, and is what puts it apart from just any company
> copyright control.
Certainly I can :) at least in the first step.
> If you make it available
On Monday, June 08, 2015 at 6:25 AM, Andreas Davour wrote:
> How about we pend this discussion until we know if the code in question will
> be relicenced to Bob's satisfaction?
Well, as mentioned earlier by Tom Morris, the original author changed to a BSD
(in Clem's terms Dead Fish) License almos
I appologies to the list for turning this into a religious war, I did not
intend that
. I should have known better, but I had hoped to avoid it by trying to be
fair and factual
. I had hoped to enducate a few people on why the GPL might night be
desired
by many projects.
To Pontus, I'm not
On Mon, Jun 08, 2015 at 11:52:48AM -0400, Clem Cole wrote:
> I appologies to the list for turning this into a religious war, I did not
> intend that .
Oh this was hardly a war :) Hardly even a squabble. And there is really nothing
religious about my views. I think we stand closer than you might
On Mon, Jun 08, 2015 at 08:02:09AM -0700, Mark Pizzolato - Info Comm wrote:
>
> That said, the code involved isn't in any way derived from a simh simulator
> so
> there is nothing just waiting to be 'folded in' to the simh project. Some
> pieces of might be useful for someone implementing a ne
About three months since I last announced anything. There have been
various development since, and I figured I should encourage people who
are using BQTCP/IP for RSX to upgrade to the latest release.
A short list of changes:
ICMP:
. ICMP packets accidentally lost the source IP address informato
18 matches
Mail list logo
