On Wed, Jun 18, 2003 at 01:24:09AM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> After the last round of discussions, the LaTeX Project has asked me to
> review and present a new revision of the LPPL, which is attached below.
>
> It is unlikely that I will be able to participate in the discussion this
> time aroun
> Mark Rafn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > There are a number of icons and images in
> > products whose original creator preferred to edit in photoshop, with crazy
> > psd files that contain layering, gamma, and other useful information. I
> > made further modifications to the resulting GIF file
Jeff Licquia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> After the last round of discussions, the LaTeX Project has asked me to
> review and present a new revision of the LPPL, which is attached below.
>
> It is unlikely that I will be able to participate in the discussion this
> time around due to time constr
Mark Rafn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Goodness, this is easy. There are a number of icons and images in
> products whose original creator preferred to edit in photoshop, with crazy
> psd files that contain layering, gamma, and other useful information. I
> made further modifications to the res
W liście z wto, 17-06-2003, godz. 02:09, Artur R. Czechowski pisze:
Hi!
As apparently nobody replied to this (at least - not to me) I'd try
to say how *I* understood the situation and what would I propose.
> III. Questions.
> 1. Are those licenses not conflicting with each other?
I think no.
You
On Tuesday, Jun 17, 2003, at 07:03 US/Eastern, Dmitry Borodaenko wrote:
The issue of storage is more controversial, all I can
give is my personal opinion that it is fair to expect that creators
keep
track of at least their own work,
I don't think its reasonable to expect me to keep track of
On Wed, Jun 18, 2003 at 11:25:42AM -0400, Brian T. Sniffen wrote:
> Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > No, you should only provide the C source, because the binaries being
> > distributed are those of the modified C program. Once I've started
> > editing the C program, I've made it
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> No, you should only provide the C source, because the binaries being
> distributed are those of the modified C program. Once I've started
> editing the C program, I've made it unambiguously clear that this is the
> preferred form for modifications; jus
Scripsit Adam Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Tue, 2003-06-17 at 02:54, Henning Makholm wrote:
> > It must be possible for me to enjoy the freedoms without
> > communicating with anybody else but those whom I voluntarily
> > decide to distribute the software to.
> Why should I have t
On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 10:49:46PM +0100, Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS wrote:
> Dmitry Borodaenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > even to its creator, 'form preferred for modification' should be chosen
> > from forms remaining in existence.
> You shouldn't be choosing at all. You should provide everything that
After the last round of discussions, the LaTeX Project has asked me to
review and present a new revision of the LPPL, which is attached below.
It is unlikely that I will be able to participate in the discussion this
time around due to time constraints, but the LaTeX people should be
around to hear
11 matches
Mail list logo
