Hi Arthur!
You wrote:
> This license looks like the MIT license, but I'm wondering if I can let
> this file in the package.
> Could you please tell me what is your opinion ?
Apart from the logo, which is definately non-free, it looks ok. Just
remove the logo and you should be fine.
--
+--
On 5/7/07, Arthur Loiret <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
% * The only modification you can make is to adapt the orbiting text to
% your product name.
%
% * The logo can be used in any scale as long as the relative
proportions
% of its elements are maintained.
Non-free.
--
Andrew Donnellan
ajdli
Hi,
I'm packaging luabind for debian but I have a license with the
doc/luabind-logo-label.ps : in the comments of this file we can see :
%--
%
% Copyright (C) 1998-2000. All rights reserved.
% Graphic design by Alexandre
On Sun, 6 May 2007, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> On 5/6/07, MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Zack Weinberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > GCC's manpages are mechanically generated from its info files. We
> > > asked the FSF how to apply the GFDL and were told that the *entire
> > > collection of
On 5/6/07, MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Zack Weinberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> GCC's manpages are mechanically generated from its info files. We
> asked the FSF how to apply the GFDL and were told that the *entire
> collection of manpages* counted as the Work, so it was okay to put the
Zack Weinberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> GCC's manpages are mechanically generated from its info files. We
> asked the FSF how to apply the GFDL and were told that the *entire
> collection of manpages* counted as the Work, so it was okay to put the
> Invariant Sections in separate manpages. See
6 matches
Mail list logo
