On Sat, Mar 8, 2014 at 2:21 AM, Francesco Poli wrote:
> After all, the 3-clause BSD license is way more permissive than the
> LGPL and does not include any restriction not present in the LGPL.
> As a consequence, I would say that offering the LGPL as a second choice
> is totally moot, once you hav
On Fri, 07 Mar 2014 20:02:49 +1100 Ben Finney wrote:
[...]
> I would recommend the copyright holder should:
>
[...]
> * Correct the LGPL text to match the GNU LGPL 2.1 exactly, as the
> license on that text requires.
I would add that, if the grant is really a dual-licensing scheme (that
is to
On Fri, Mar 07, 2014 at 08:02:49PM +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
> Anirudha Bose writes:
[...]
> Paul Wise writes:
>
> > For the record, here is the license text:
> >
> > ==
> > Cling Release License
> >
Anirudha Bose writes:
> Due to my lack of knowledge in this, I would like to know if Cling is
> fully compliant with the Debian Free Software Guidelines (DFSG) so
> that I can proceed ahead with packaging it for the Debian archive.
Thank you for working to improve Debian, and for treating seriou
On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 4:24 PM, Paul Wise wrote:
> For the record, here is the license text:
To me this looks like a BSD-3-clause and LGPL-2.1 dual license. The
project is therefore probably DFSG-free.
--
bye,
pabs
http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-req
On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 4:04 PM, Anirudha Bose wrote:
> This is a link to the License file of Cling:
> https://github.com/root-mirror/root/blob/master/interpreter/cling/LICENSE.TXT
For the record, here is the license text:
==
I want to package Cling, an interactive C++ interpreter built on the top of
LLVM and Clang libraries, developed and used at CERN.
This is a link to the License file of Cling:
https://github.com/root-mirror/root/blob/master/interpreter/cling/LICENSE.TXT
Due to my lack of knowledge in this, I would
7 matches
Mail list logo
