escape codes. There's no
free way to say "only free-software clients can connect to this telnet
daemon".
--
Glenn Maynard
quot;; it's "allow non-free documentation in main because we don't
have time before Sarge to deal with it all". In no way does it discourage
maintainers with the time and inclination to deal with it before Sarge
from doing so.
(I'd suggest that gnu-standards be moved to non-free, though, not removed.)
--
Glenn Maynard
eatest disjoint between mail and reply goes to Jonas
> Meurer. Other awards for this post include "best hijacking of an unrelated
> thread to reignite dead topics", and "The Non-sequitur award for cognative
> dissonance".
But JACK HOWARTH IS A FUCKING IDIOT ...
--
Glenn Maynard
ttributions, that was written by Martin Olsson,
> not Tollef Fog Heen.
I think the only bottom-quoting scheme I've seen which is more annoying
than that is bare indentation (which only RMS seems to use) ...
--
Glenn Maynard
t that this is a result of hardware implementation decisions
is irrelevant.)
--
Glenn Maynard
g a shared
library for an executable, saying "we're not allowed to distribute this;
download it from someone else". That's contrib.
It's a software dependency, because the blob is software--if it wasn't
a software dependency, we wouldn't have anything to disagree about.
--
Glenn Maynard
it should go in
main". That's bogus; by that logic, everything in contrib would be allowed
in main.
--
Glenn Maynard
ware when
> it's a BLOB.
As far as I can tell, you're agreeing with me. :)
--
Glenn Maynard
ee software.
"contrib" exists for software which is free but fails SC#1, "we will never
make the system depend on an item of non-free software". Moving something
from contrib to main that does, in fact, depend on such an item is a pretty
basic violation of Debian's principles.
--
Glenn Maynard
hem, as long as the
system as a whole continues to work and the packaged data itself is Free;
and that contrib has no basis in the SC or DFSG at all?
--
Glenn Maynard
_only_ a GPL-term and not part of
> the SC.
You can keep saying that all you want, but it remains the most commonly
used and most functional definition for "source code" available, and I
fail to see the motive behind objecting to its use as a metric for
determining whether something is source. (For example, it clearly comes
to the correct answer above, in the case of machine-obfuscated code.)
--
Glenn Maynard
On Sun, Dec 12, 2004 at 09:27:05PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Dec 11, Glenn Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > If the driver has to be able to open the file and read the blob so it
> > can send it to the device, there's a clear relationship and depende
chop out code from programs that makes use
of optional non-free libraries, moving just those pieces into contrib;
drivers (in the context of a kernel) seem like the same situation. (I
don't yet feel too strongly about this parallel, though.)
--
Glenn Maynard
; any form of support for Nvidia graphics cards.
No source is no source; obfuscated code is not source. I hope we can agree
that crippling DFSG#2 in order to squeeze non-free nVidia code into main is
not a good thing to do.
--
Glenn Maynard
't start by demanding freedom, saying "if you do this, it'll benefit
everyone--trust me!"
(This isn't to say that I think non-free firmware belongs in main, of
course. It's a difficult issue, and I don't quite know the right answer
yet.)
--
Glenn Maynard
urpose.
That's an issue of "Depends:", not of the Social Contract's "never make
the system depend on an item of non-free software", which I believe is
the issue. (My understanding--which may well be wrong, of course--is that
the tech-ctte's authority does not extend to the Social Contract or the
DFSG.)
--
Glenn Maynard
e are some corner cases (of what seems to me to be copyright abuse),
eg. in the AIM client case, but that's a very different scenario and
should be treated independently.
--
Glenn Maynard
all:
if the firmware isn't even in non-free, then it's a legal issue and philosophy
doesn't enter into it.
--
Glenn Maynard
ain or contrib.
The active question, here, is not whether these drivers are Free; we're
assuming they're Free, and asking whether they should go in main or
contrib due to the firmware being non-free.
--
Glenn Maynard
shed hardware is a broken device" analogy is
bought, the fact remains that many copies of the hardware still do function,
having working firmware. The existance of non-working hardware is irrelevant.
--
Glenn Maynard
On Fri, Dec 17, 2004 at 02:37:45AM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> Glenn Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > No, there's a very concrete reason: given an installation of Debian
> > main, the driver works. Drivers that require non-free firmware don't
>
ctionary lawyers nitpick
"software", the real point is probably long lost, anyway ... :)
--
Glenn Maynard
d Erik
> Naggum, so this should be a walk in the park.
So now you're saying that expecting that documentation be Free is "idiocy",
and that the majority doesn't actually want it, despite the very clear
results of GR 2004-003. Sorry, that's a tired old complaint that's not
even worth refuting ...
--
Glenn Maynard
On Fri, Dec 17, 2004 at 09:39:46AM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> Glenn Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 17, 2004 at 02:37:45AM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> >> Glenn Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> > No, there
r. Despite that,
the emulator would still go in contrib.
(The firmware debate is due, in part, to it not being immediately clear
whether a driver requiring firmware to fire up a device counts as
"depend[ing] on an item of non-free software", but your emulator example
has no such ambiguity.)
--
Glenn Maynard
ed to be removed, overwritten, or lost; where I'd call a device
with a hosed flash "broken". (The former I'd sell on eBay as "drive
only, no packaging, drivers or manuals"; the latter I'd expect to see
sold "AS-IS, UNTESTED".)
However, this is a corner case, and I think the "simpler" cases of simple
on-card flash should be dealt with before banging our heads on the corner
cases.
--
Glenn Maynard
ng me to have any non-
free dependencies in main that I want? Of course not--and the same thing
doesn't work if the secondary CPU is on a sound card's DSP or a SCSI card's
processor. The CPU being used isn't an important metric here (even if
it's not obvious what the real metric is).
--
Glenn Maynard
oid them and still achieve your
> > goals.
>
> There is no comparison between killing people and bouncing email. Whatever
> point you were trying to make is lost. The thread is over.
You're the one trying to force that comparison, not TB, so it's apparently
your point that's been lost.
Nice try, though.
--
Glenn Maynard
best.
> > This could be as simple as mounting a tmpfs on /lib/firmware, and wgetting
> I'd say that a local cache is needed, though whether it's used should be up
> to the local admin.
... so I don't know why we're talking about implementation details. :)
--
Glenn Maynard
rk availability removed - RELEVANT CONTEXT]
The removed quotes were superfluous to my response, so no, they weren't
relevant. Stop yelling.
--
Glenn Maynard
I think some indication of removal is useful, I mark it with a
blank line between quotes, instead of ">"; this is clear enough, since
the full text is always available. All text in all messages is relevant
to other text; not removing text which is relevant to some other quote
would mean never removing anything. (As your complaints about my quoting
are both frivilous and in a somewhat demanding tone, I doubt I'll respond
to them any further.)
--
Glenn Maynard
ion.
As everyone understood his point, it has not been lost--regardless of how
many times you assert that is has.
[1] "You cannot justify the bad things that happen as a result of your
actions by saying that your goals *require* bad things to happen."
--
Glenn Maynard
7;t get CCs. Maybe
> you doing something wrong then? Please ask those people how you can rid off
> of off-list CC replies.
This is incorrect. The proper way to respond to lists in Mutt (especially
on Debian lists, where it's policy) is to add the lists to "subscribe",
and press "L" (list reply).
--
Glenn Maynard
headers to say what he wants, too. It's a lot more
time-effective, mail for mail, than trying to teach people how to use their
MUA.)
--
Glenn Maynard
;s a legitimate way to work around blatent copyright
abuse, so it gets more slack than blatent SC evasion; but I can't put my
finger on any tangible difference in these cases, and maybe there isn't
one.)
--
Glenn Maynard
;
above), I just can't bring myself to condemn those who we are unwilling to
ignore
it completely.
--
Glenn Maynard
For example, the
vast majority of the stuff that runs in Wine is non-free--but not all, so
Wine goes in main. The relative quantities aren't relevant.
(It's not clear whether data beyond the scope of Debian--such as comics
being downloaded--are relevant to this, either, but that&#
hat only work with non-free servers.
Err, that's what I meant:
> (It's not clear whether data beyond the scope of Debian--such as comics
> being downloaded--are relevant to this, either, but that's another debate.)
--
Glenn Maynard
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMA
IT degree, Zen Cart can be installed and
> > set-up by anyone with the most basic computer skills. Others are so
> > expensive ... not Zen Cart, it's FREE!
>
> So what does it actually do, besides generate buzzwords?
But he seems to be having so much fun writing bad comme
usr/bin/strip shows
no sign of the -f option mentioned in the info page found from your
google search). I had no idea it was even implemented, though.
(Aha: the strip tool mentioned is in elfutils, which is non-free. Blah.)
--
Glenn Maynard
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wit
#x27;t know which is most appropriate.)
I'd hope it wouldn't be called "life", though.
--
Glenn Maynard
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
nconvenience others?
(Seems more like an "anti-anyone-mailing-me-at-all" measure, really. Why
would anyone put up with this?)
--
Glenn Maynard
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
bably not sufficient to allow
redistribution in non-free, either.
Please see:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2004/01/msg00267.html
--
Glenn Maynard
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
tributions,
while Debian is, from what I recall, the *only* way to get a sensible Unix
installation on many of the less common systems.
--
Glenn Maynard
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
bscribe". Trouble? Contact
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> Read all of the messages. The relevant info is right there.
Do it! NOW!
Er.
--
Glenn Maynard
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
)
> (Maybe it's time to resurrect non-us)
I don't know how many times this can be said: non-us is *not a solution*
to patents affecting the US, and never has been. AFAIK, non-us was an
archive that was uploaded to from outside the US, but could be freely and
legally used from insi
orry, couldn't be helped. :)
--
Glenn Maynard
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
be used, not just GNU tools.
s/GNU //?
(Putting "GNU" there reminds me vaguely of the back of a shampoo container:
"After shampooing with Pantene(tm) Shampoo, follow up with Pantene(tm)
Conditioner, Pantene(tm) skin cleanser, ...")
--
Glenn Maynard
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email
ult on most lists: usually, most people in a
discussion are subscribed. It makes more sense to me to require that the
few people posting to a list unsubscribed set a header saying so, than
the majority of people posting subscribed do so.
--
Glenn Maynard
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMA
s out of
insert mode" behavior.
> - some commands like 'cw' display differently in vim, although the end
>result of the keystrokes is the same for all the standard vi commands I
>use
(don't know)
> - nvi flashes the screen/bell when a command fails; vim does not
":set visualbell"
--
Glenn Maynard
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 04:44:13PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> Glenn Maynard wrote:
> > ":set compatible" will switch Vim's behavior for all of these, except for:
>
> Nope, I was running vim in compatible mode (the default without a
> ~/.vimrc) for all of them.
library images",
though, which is a specific term that clearly excludes shell scripts.)
--
Glenn Maynard
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
imple configuration change is a showstopper? (":set
compatible noautoindent" in /etc/vim/vimrc.) I havn't seen any significant
differences between vi and vim mentioned that aren't trivially fixed.
--
Glenn Maynard
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
er
used old vi, so I don't know the accuracy of the claim, but everything listed
so far are things that :set compatible "fixes". (Except maybe the display of
"cw"--I'm not sure if nvi or vim's display is how vi did it.)
[1] http://www.vim.org/viusers.php
--
Glen
On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 02:37:59PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 19, 2005 at 10:58:02PM -0500, Glenn Maynard wrote:
> > > TBH, I think these are showstoppers. Otherwise, as long as the space issue
> > > is fixed as you say it is, sounds fine.
> > I'm c
default, then people who like old vi get it, and people who like
new vim can change it with just .vimrc. A rare opportunity--everybody wins. :)
--
Glenn Maynard
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 01:11:20PM +0100, Gabor Gombas wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 12:19:16AM -0500, Glenn Maynard wrote:
>
> > Well, I get to use other people's systems now and then, and I'm always
> > having
> > to ask people to install vim. If vim is
ot with the actual numbers
> might make sense.
I'd much rather have to use a system with vim and my .vimrc installed, but
lacking a few "big" features like syntax highlighting, than have to use
nvi. For me, it's a clear win: at least I can edit files. I'm probably
opinion is not interesting; and it would let
people get an idea if a lot of people are voting based on rationale
that has been discussed and disproven (eg. "vim is huge" and "vim
differs too much from vi").
(I wish people had to write a few paragraphs justifying their votes
for government elections. Votes in essay format. One can dream ...)
--
Glenn Maynard
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
orms Debian supports?
--
Glenn Maynard
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
n't always have the ability to install packages.
> Please cc me on replies.
This is the only time I'll do so, to remind you to set Mail-Followup-To.
It's your job to set headers expressing your preferences (which you
only have to do once, in your mailer configuration), not everyone el
ility from the fact that my fingers have
>
> If your fingers aren't talking to you, perhaps you should also list them
> as MIA.
Finger habits are hard to change, especially for an editor like vi. Ridicule
is unwarranted.
--
Glenn Maynard
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
e patch clauses,
there are so few of them that it's probably not that big a battle, but
if you do want to fight that fight, I don't think "PHP" is any worse
than "Apache", so the objection should be extended across the others
and not single out PHP.
--
Glenn Maynard
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
n in main" before
> long.
Before or after the next renaming of "creationism", I wonder?
--
Glenn Maynard
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
terms", and how one
really could apply the DFSG to texts, but not terms, and end up with something
reasonable. Not really a worthy fight, of course, but if you want to
formalize an exception, then I think knowing the difference is important.
--
Glenn Maynard
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
sts of the DFSG or not," are you seriously
> saying that such a resolution requires only a majority vote?
If you take these "interpretive" GRs as not requiring 3:1, then you can
bypass the 3:1 requirement entirely merely by phrasing your changes as
an "interpretion", and y
onstitution. Those loopholes
can always be created, if everyone is allowed their own interpretation of
the rules; that's not an indication of lack of forethought.
Fortunately, as is typically the case, everyone is not allowed their own
interpretation of the rules.
--
Glenn Maynard
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
the proposer of this option another reason to think about rewording
it: whether editorial or not, the labelling of GR2004-003 as such *has*
caused such attacks. If you want invariant sections and the rest of the
problems to be considered free, say so.)
--
Glenn Maynard
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
gt; works depend on a package containing a rootkit. This way, their
> installation would always comply with the license.
Or another popular argument these days, "not being allowed to put a password
on your machine is just a practical problem, which doesn't make the license
non-free"
s with three paragraphs that seemed like a reply to
someone arguing "documentation isn't software, so it doesn't have to be
free", but nobody was doing that.
> --
> ksig --random|
er? :)
--
Glenn Maynard
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 07:41:03AM +0100, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 12, 2006 at 07:53:39PM -0500, Glenn Maynard wrote:
> > Nobody is lying. A "lie" is an untruth made with the intent to
> > deceive. Debian doesn't try to hide these unmodifiable lic
ify that).
But it's what it does say, and I don't see how an estoppel argument based
on something RMS has said is relevant, when RMS does not own the work.
--
Glenn Maynard
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
rware (166Mhz / 64 M mem).
> >
> > But that's just it. It's for *sending* mail only. What is the
> > purpose of a GUI for sending mail?
>
> The small memory footprint. In minimalistic Window manager +
> minimalistic program to send mail.
Err, who uses GTK
On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 01:45:24PM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote:
> Honestly, I could care less whether it's in contrib or main
It's nice to see that Debian Developers actually care about their Social
Contract, and hold acceptance by Debian in such high regard.
--
Glenn May
tupid. The very phrasing was lightly humerous, not an attack.
(I don't know why I'm replying seriously to a nameless top-poster with
an email address "[EMAIL PROTECTED]", though. My bad. :)
--
Glenn Maynard
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
nd there's no References: header, which
makes threads much harder to follow, and will probably get you ignored by
many people since your posts won't appear in the normal flow of the thread.
(I actually do point them out in the hope that you'll fix them. If you
don't care enoug
all, unless one limits oneself to public domain works.
Adrian, you're deliberately wasting the project's time with a very old,
eternity-since-debunked "argument". That's known as "trolling". Unless
you have something of value to say, go away.
--
Glenn Maynard
t;All GPL'ed programs have to go to non-free"
a troll. I believe this is self-evident to everyone reading this
thread, so I don't feel obligated to explain myself further.
--
Glenn Maynard
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
nse I've seen in use, including the 2-clause BSD
license and the X11 license.
FYI, I found the above via google: site:lists.debian.org "license texts"
--
Glenn Maynard
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
even though as a practical matter Debian
would be forced to grumble and accept any problems that are found. (As
I mentioned in my last mail, the "unmodifiable license text" "problem"
is not GPL-specific.)
--
Glenn Maynard
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with
ches people that they need non-free
things". Here's a tip: it's a *good thing* to teach people that they
still need non-free things, if it's the truth; it just might inspire
people to create free versions, or convince the FSF to free up their works.
That's a fundamental reaso
e one you reference above[1]), people
debate them for a while, and opinions change, becoming better formed and
more strongly grounded as a result of debate.
[1] referring to the current "on hold" SC, per GR 2004-003:
http://www.debian.org/vote/2004/vote_003
[2] The link on the DWN page is wrong; a currently accurate one is
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2001/11/msg00096.html
or Message-id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
[3] Message-id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
Glenn Maynard
on-free; rather, we don't want gcc's documentation to *be* non-free.
The moving to non-free is just a side-effect; Adrian seems to be
saying that we should eliminate the side-effect and ignore the core
problem.
--
Glenn Maynard
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a sub
non-essential (non-license-
text) pieces that *can't be modified at all*, or even removed. (I find it
continually disappointing that people will actually argue that completely
invariant, untouchable text is "free enough"; I have to wonder why they're
even here.)
--
Glenn Maynard
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
case you'll hear a loud laugher.
Maybe, since you conspicuously omitted the "and therefore" part in
case 2; the practical problems with invariant sections have been well
explored. (I'm not going to waste my time digging up discussions about
them for you, since you'll j
nd why a given restriction is non-free.
--
Glenn Maynard
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cumbersome, but I do
> feel that the mixture of different "freeness" in non-free is a bit
> unfair for those pieces of software that just fail a small point.
I don't believe "forbidden to be modified in any way" to be a "small point".
--
Glenn Maynard
--
T
this is irrelevant: if people really think that
non-free documentation should be allowed in Debian, propose a GR to
allow it. Nothing short of that will make it so. If people really
think they were "tricked", fine--fix it with another GR. Unless and
until that happens, Debian's po
d
remain in Debian because you're not able to do so.
Your argument here can just as easily be applied to anything non-free;
would you seriously claim that, if Qmail was in main and I was to file
a bug against it for being non-free, that it should remain in main until
I write a replaceme
On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 09:31:53PM -0700, Brian Nelson wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 12:03:07AM -0400, Glenn Maynard wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 05:31:52AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > > If you really want to retain your "everything is software" point of
tly clear: documentation must be
Free, according to the DFSG, and nothing short of another GR will change
that. I believe this to be obvious and self-evident. (The rest is
tangental, and this conversation has too many mini-threads, so I'm
leaving it at that.)
--
Glenn Maynard
--
To UNSUBSCRI
m willing to continue arguments pertaining to the GFDL,
but these "we didn't *really* want to require documentation to be free"
arguments are going nowhere and are a waste of time, so I'm dropping them.
--
Glenn Maynard
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For which the simple answer is:
> > Read http://people.debian.org/~srivasta/Position_Statement.xhtml
>
> I have the same question around for some months.
> I have read the link above but I didn't find any reply.
> Any extra clue?
Those of us on d-legal have no idea what your q
ur collective memory." I'd hope that such a header as
"No-External-Archive" would never be honored (except perhaps to bounce
the message--the only acceptable way to not be archived is to not post).
[1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2002/03/msg00091.html
--
Glenn Ma
On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 05:28:46PM +1000, Pascal Hakim wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 03:03 -0400, Glenn Maynard wrote:
> > > They might one day. It's possible to restrict http://lists.debian.org to
> > > stop or slow down people leeching across the web archives.
> &g
me--so please don't dismiss it. Package names are a shared
namespace, and must be chosen intelligently.
--
Glenn Maynard
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ered". Making mboxes available wouldn't make things any easier for
address harvesters.
(In practice I don't spend much time reading old threads, and it's more
convenient to read a couple messages by Googling for a Message-ID than to
download big mboxes. I wouldn't use them ve
at your option")
like the GPL's be used in a shrink-wrap license?
I also don't understand why you're so opposed to it. Why should I not be
able to say "you can distribute under these conditions; in addition, John
may offer you a new license in the future, terms which you may accept or
ignore"?
--
Glenn Maynard
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ast, UW has (in my opinion) played deliberate word games to
retroactively revoke the Freeness of a prior Pine license, and this license
is clearly non-free *without* any such stretching or contriving.
--
Glenn Maynard
Pine License and Legal Notices
Pine and Pico are registered trademarks of the
On Wed, May 11, 2005 at 12:28:29AM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> On 5/10/05, Glenn Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > In the past, UW has (in my opinion) played deliberate word games to
> > retroactively revoke the Freeness of a prior Pine license, and this license
&g
1 - 100 of 170 matches
Mail list logo
