On Fri, 16 Dec 2011 20:06:54 +0100 Anton Gladky wrote:
> Hello,
Hi Anton, thanks for following up on this issue.
>
> does it mean, that FreeCAD upstream and others (gmsh, for example) has
> chosen the wrong license?
No, I don't think that this is the conclusion we should draw from the
issue un
Hello,
does it mean, that FreeCAD upstream and others (gmsh, for example) has
chosen the wrong license?
Thanks.
Anton
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
On Thu, 15 Dec 2011 21:02:18 -0500 Adam C Powell IV wrote:
[...]
> Or do you agree with Francesco's analysis based on the preamble, which
> is not legally binding?
My GPL-compatibility analysis is not based on the preamble: where did
you get the impression that it was?
As I said in the original
On Thu, 15 Dec 2011 21:00:39 -0500 Adam C Powell IV wrote:
> Hi Francesco,
Hi Adam!
>
> On Sun, 2011-11-13 at 19:30 +0100, Francesco Poli wrote:
[...]
> > Please let me understand:
> >
> > (0) you (still) don't think that the OCTPL is GPL-incompatible
> >
> > or
> >
> > (1) you agree that
Hi Francesco,
On Sun, 2011-11-13 at 19:30 +0100, Francesco Poli wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Nov 2011 11:49:10 -0500 Adam C Powell IV wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 2011-11-13 at 15:20 +0100, Francesco Poli wrote:
> [...]
> > > Yes, but I think freecad should not be released in a stable version
> > > (again) with t
On Fri, 2011-12-02 at 18:15 +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> Hi
>
> as we have been asked about this license problem and not yet provided an
> answer:
>
> Either the licensing is changed so that the incompatibility no longer
> is there (by either getting the license changed, or exceptions in the
>
Hi
as we have been asked about this license problem and not yet provided an
answer:
Either the licensing is changed so that the incompatibility no longer
is there (by either getting the license changed, or exceptions in the
other parts, or by using replacement software which does not have
lic
On Tue, 15 Nov 2011 20:44:11 +0100 Anton Gladky wrote:
> It seems, there is a slight update of the license dated March 2011 [1].
> Can anyone, please, have a look at this license?
> Is it still GPL-incompatible?
[...]
> [1] http://www.opencascade.org/getocc/license/
Hi Anton!
Thanks a lot for fol
It seems, there is a slight update of the license dated March 2011 [1].
Can anyone, please, have a look at this license?
Is it still GPL-incompatible?
Thanks,
Anton
[1] http://www.opencascade.org/getocc/license/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject
On Sun, 13 Nov 2011 22:08:34 +0100 Anton Gladky wrote:
> Francesco,
>
> are your emails to Open CASCADE S.A.S. available somewhere in
> ML-archives, or it was private mails?
They were private e-mail messages, and therefore not publicly archived.
--
http://www.inventati.org/frx/frx-gpg-key-tra
Francesco,
are your emails to Open CASCADE S.A.S. available somewhere in
ML-archives, or it was private mails?
Anton
On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 7:44 PM, Francesco Poli
wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Nov 2011 12:40:48 -0500 Adam C Powell IV wrote:
>
>> I think we leave it there pending a decision by the pro
On Sun, 13 Nov 2011 12:40:48 -0500 Adam C Powell IV wrote:
> I think we leave it there pending a decision by the project, which will
> either allow it into testing or remove it from unstable.
Please let me be clear and explicit on this: I would not be happy at
all, if freecad were removed from De
On Sun, 13 Nov 2011 11:49:10 -0500 Adam C Powell IV wrote:
> On Sun, 2011-11-13 at 15:20 +0100, Francesco Poli wrote:
[...]
> > Yes, but I think freecad should not be released in a stable version
> > (again) with this serious issue unsolved.
>
> Indeed, a package with a copyright/licensing issue
I think we leave it there pending a decision by the project, which will
either allow it into testing or remove it from unstable.
No need to do anything else in the meantime. I think we should continue
to develop the package, so it's in top shape in case the project
approves it, it's available to
Ok, thanks for both opinions,
I agree, that we cannot put freecad into testing.
I was hoping, that OCE will fix the issue, but it is seems not...
So, if the license issue is not resolved we will request deletion of
freecad from unstable?
Thanks.
Anton
On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 5:49 PM, Adam C P
On Sun, 2011-11-13 at 15:20 +0100, Francesco Poli wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Nov 2011 19:18:01 +0100 Anton Gladky wrote:
>
> > Can we decrease the severity of this bug to return the freecad back to
> > testing?
>
> Why?
> I think the bug is still unfixed and still serious, unfortunately.
>
> > The bug
On Thu, 10 Nov 2011 19:18:01 +0100 Anton Gladky wrote:
> Can we decrease the severity of this bug to return the freecad back to
> testing?
Why?
I think the bug is still unfixed and still serious, unfortunately.
> The bug filed on March, but freecad was removed from testing on May
> because of F
Can we decrease the severity of this bug to return the freecad back to testing?
The bug filed on March, but freecad was removed from testing on May
because of FTBFS's (I think).
Now FTBFS's are fixed on all platforms, but freecad cannot return back
to testing.
Anyway, this issue cannot be resolved
18 matches
Mail list logo
