On 11-12-01 at 03:56pm, Felipe Sateler wrote: > On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 15:25, Jonas Smedegaard <d...@jones.dk> wrote: > >> > I sure prefer if you are not lazy but instead respectful to those > >> > developers that put effort into inventing and maintaining a tool > >> > that is clearly good enough that you use it. > >> > >> hmm, i don't think this is about not respecting the developers of > >> those great tools. even if i was "lazy and [...] treat it all as > >> [...] GPL-2+" there would be a copyright clause that acknowledges > >> the work. > > > > Respecting copyright is one thing. Respecting licensing is another. > > Why do you suggest that respecting licensing involves putting stuff > into the copyright file? There are a few licenses that require > that[1], but those involve only stuff that gets shipped in binary > packages (because the source is already documented by itself. > Otherwise, it would be undistributable). > > [1] More correctly, debian's approach to complying is putting the > stuff in the copyright file.
Uhm, perhaps we are talking past each other here: In above I do not see the opposite of "respect" being "violation of license" but simply being "disrespectful". Does it make sense now? - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
