Re: Bug#460591: Falcon P.L. license (ITP:Bug#460591)

2008-04-08 Thread Giancarlo Niccolai
MJ Ray wrote: > Giancarlo Niccolai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> MJ Ray wrote: >> >>> Anyway, this is the show-stopper. Contaminates other software. DFSG 9. >>> It's the parts of FPL sections 1, 2 and 5 about Scripts. Clear enough? >&

Re: Bug#460591: Falcon P.L. license (ITP:Bug#460591)

2008-04-01 Thread Giancarlo Niccolai
MJ Ray wrote: > Giancarlo Niccolai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> skribis: > >> MJ Ray wrote: [...] >> >>> In general, I'm disappointed to see this licence proliferation. >>> >> I am too. >> >> There isn't any single

Re: ITP:Bug#460591 - Falcon P.L. license

2008-03-31 Thread Giancarlo Niccolai
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Walter Landry wrote: > Giancarlo Niccolai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I am working now at this. However, I have a notice in every file >> stating that the file is released under the terms described in the >> "LICENSE

Re: ITP:Bug#460591 - Falcon P.L. license

2008-03-30 Thread Giancarlo Niccolai
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Walter Landry wrote: > Giancarlo Niccolai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Walter Landry wrote: >>> Giancarlo Niccolai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> In example, I can release Falcon as a Debian package under

Re: Falcon P.L. license (ITP:Bug#460591)

2008-03-28 Thread Giancarlo Niccolai
funny exceptions here, and frankly I can't see why that should be considered "better". Tons of exceptions, different from case to case, doesn't make a better legal scenario for the open source community than a small set of better suited licenses. Nevertheless, I am dual licensing Falcon with GPLv3. If you want to get more restrictions, I am not stopping you... :-) Bests, Giancarlo Niccolai. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Falcon P.L. license (ITP:Bug#460591)

2008-03-27 Thread Giancarlo Niccolai
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Josselin Mouette wrote: > On sam, 2008-03-22 at 22:33 +0100, Giancarlo Niccolai wrote: >>> Have you considered the GNU LGPL (v2.1)? >>> >> Yes, but I encountered strong resistance from FSF when proposing >> a "l

Re: Falcon P.L. license (ITP:Bug#460591)

2008-03-27 Thread Giancarlo Niccolai
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Josselin Mouette wrote: > On ven, 2008-03-21 at 10:09 +0100, Giancarlo Niccolai wrote: >>> This clause makes the license a copyleft one. It is free, but >>> this is a huge restriction compared to the original license. >>&

Re: Bug#460591: Falcon P.L. license (ITP:Bug#460591)

2008-03-25 Thread Giancarlo Niccolai
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 MJ Ray wrote: > Giancarlo Niccolai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] >> The license is tightly based on Apache 2, with extra >> clarifications and permissions. [...] > > Summary: I believe that any interpreter under this

Re: ITP:Bug#460591 - Falcon P.L. license

2008-03-25 Thread Giancarlo Niccolai
7;t renounced all claim to works in that > language. They look like lawyerbombs to me because I don't know > any better. Is that a good thing to have when trying to promote > your new language? > > Regards, The idea I tried to follow is exactly that to free the language d

Re: ITP:Bug#460591 - Falcon P.L. license

2008-03-25 Thread Giancarlo Niccolai
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Walter Landry wrote: > Giancarlo Niccolai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> In example, I can release Falcon as a Debian package under GPL, and >> let users pick FPLL if they wish. > > That would be perfect. Many other pr

Re: ITP:Bug#460591 - Falcon P.L. license

2008-03-22 Thread Giancarlo Niccolai
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Francesco Poli wrote: > On Thu, 20 Mar 2008 10:35:16 +0100 (CET) Giancarlo Niccolai wrote: > > | "Embedding Works" shall mean any work, whether in Source | or > Object form, that links (or binds by name) to the | inter

Re: Falcon P.L. license (ITP:Bug#460591)

2008-03-22 Thread Giancarlo Niccolai
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Francesco Poli wrote: > On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 10:09:27 +0100 Giancarlo Niccolai wrote: > > [...] >> In other words, the >> aim of this comma is to prevent someone from adding a "frobotz" >> statement which nitfo

Re: Falcon P.L. license (ITP:Bug#460591)

2008-03-21 Thread Giancarlo Niccolai
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Josselin Mouette wrote: > On mer, 2008-03-19 at 20:34 +0100, Giancarlo Niccolai wrote: >> The license is tightly based on Apache 2, with extra clarifications >> and permissions. > > This is, well, an interesting claim. > >

Re: ITP:Bug#460591 - Falcon P.L. license

2008-03-20 Thread Giancarlo Niccolai
Francesco Poli wrote: > On Wed, 19 Mar 2008 19:59:33 +0100 Giancarlo Niccolai wrote: > I assume you mean that you would like to have your license "analyzed" or "revised" by debian-legal. Yes, sorry, the word was eaten while editing :-/ > >> The license is ti

Falcon P.L. license (ITP:Bug#460591)

2008-03-19 Thread Giancarlo Niccolai
on as the lawyer I hired will provide me with a legal advice. In the meanwhile, I have opened an ITP bug, for which Debian Legal clearance is needed. Here follows the text of the license. TIA , Giancarlo Niccolai. == Falcon Programming Language

ITP:Bug#460591 - Falcon P.L. license

2008-03-19 Thread Giancarlo Niccolai
on as the lawyer I hired will provide me with a legal advice. In the meanwhile, I have opened an ITP bug, for which Debian Legal clearance is needed. Here follows the text of the license. TIA , Giancarlo Niccolai. == Falcon Programming Language