On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 10:30:29AM +0200, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote: > So, instead, we can say that, *if* anyone should complain > > - it strikes us that these legalese are in place to prevent > misuse/slander etc, and *not* to slow down other free software > projects, or hinder other free software (*your*) users?
That applies to Linux projects, and probably *BSD projects (although some participants in those love to slander GPL projects, *cough* like my brother *cough* :). It may or may not apply to Apple; I think it depends on which day of the week it is. It definitely doesn't apply to Microsoft. (although thanks to the GNU FDL'd non-logo, this is no longer a concern) > - we still feel that the way we use all logos, is a helpful, > respectful and most probably the best possible way we can > do it. > - what would help us, is if *you* had some page up, not with > what we cannot do, but rather with helpful examples of what > we *can* do. please point us to the logo you want us to > use and we'll replace it asap, thanks! *sigh* ok, I'll dump the logos from the old download page into the new Unix page. > > > I still think having all distro's linux logos has a nice warm > > > fuzzy look. > > > > Oh mao no. Then we'd need *another* set of legalese, look up all > > the licenses on the individual distros, etc. > > I say, don't get your panties all in a knot. Since my contributions are directly proportional to my amount of panty-knottedness, shouldn't you deliberately knot them? ;) (seriously, "immense irritation" is the most motivating factor for me working on lilypond) Cheers, - Graham _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
