On Sat, Dec 8, 2018 at 2:53 AM Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> On December 7, 2018 6:34:39 PM UTC, Francesco Poli wrote:
> >
> >It was a long ongoing process.
> >The news is that it seems to have finally come to an end...
This appears to be the commit where it happened:
https://github.com/open
Il December 7, 2018 7:03:47 PM UTC, Thorsten Alteholz ha
scritto:
>Hi Giacomo,
Hi Thorsten, thanks for pointing out these issues.
>On Fri, 7 Dec 2018, Giacomo Tesio wrote:
>> If you can help me understand the problems you see, we could try to
>> design a new test that make them evident together
Hi Giacomo,
On Fri, 7 Dec 2018, Giacomo Tesio wrote:
If you can help me understand the problems you see, we could try to
design a new test that make them evident together.
some terms are ambiguous and need to be defined. For example how do
you want to use "shall"?
What is an organization? Is
On December 7, 2018 6:34:39 PM UTC, Francesco Poli
wrote:
>On Fri, 07 Dec 2018 17:04:22 +1100 Ben Finney wrote:
>This has already been mentioned in the past:
>https://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2015/09/msg1.html
>
>It was a long ongoing process.
>The news is that it seems to have finally c
On Fri, 07 Dec 2018 17:04:22 +1100 Ben Finney wrote:
> Sebastian Andrzej Siewior writes:
[...]
> > So this is true for series 1.1.1 and earlier. The master branch will be
> > released as 3.0 and some point. So we have some time to clarify this
> > :)
>
> Ah, so this is not a change that has happ
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior writes:
> On December 7, 2018 6:04:22 AM UTC, Ben Finney wrote:
> >Is the grant of license somewhere in the Git repository to be examined?
>
> So the readme file
> https://github.com/openssl/openssl/blob/master/README
>
> has this:
>
> The OpenSSL toolkit is licensed
On December 7, 2018 6:04:22 AM UTC, Ben Finney wrote:
>Sebastian Andrzej Siewior writes:
>> The wording (of the addon) was drafted on debian-legal a few years
>> back.
>
>Can you give citations to what you're referring to? there have been
>many
>such discussions so it would help if we're both tal
Perhaps I've got the problem.
Maybe we lack a forth clear-cut test expressing your insight that can
exclude the Hacking License as a free license?
I would be glad to help designing such test even if it would turn out
that there's no way to reform the Hacking License to pass it.
Unfortunately, rig
On Fri, 7 Dec 2018 at 12:21, Giacomo Tesio wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Dec 2018 at 12:14, Giacomo Tesio wrote:
> > My Free Software is a gift and I want it to stay free for everybody
> > and to keep generating more gifts for everybody recursively and
> > unbound.
>
> Before you ask: this does mean in any
On Fri, 7 Dec 2018 at 12:14, Giacomo Tesio wrote:
> My Free Software is a gift and I want it to stay free for everybody
> and to keep generating more gifts for everybody recursively and
> unbound.
Before you ask: this does mean in any way that the Hacking License
limits in any way the possibility
On Fri, 7 Dec 2018 at 11:07, Xavier wrote:
>
> Le 06/12/2018 à 10:29, Giacomo Tesio a écrit :
> > Il giorno gio 6 dic 2018 alle ore 02:12 Ben Finney
> > ha scritto:
> >> Giacomo, I again ask you: please don't impose on the free software
> >> community the burden of yet another roll-your-own licen
Le 06/12/2018 à 10:29, Giacomo Tesio a écrit :
> Il giorno gio 6 dic 2018 alle ore 02:12 Ben Finney
> ha scritto:
>> Giacomo, I again ask you: please don't impose on the free software
>> community the burden of yet another roll-your-own license text.
>
> Ben, I'm a hacker. And I'm Italian.
> To m
12 matches
Mail list logo
