Re: Bug#903092: [RSVP] php-elisp: permission to relicense contributions required from past contributors

his bug to confirm that you consent to GPL-3+ > > >> relicensing of your past contributions. > > > > Php-elisp is ready to upload. Would you please confirm if GPL-3+ is > > an acceptable license for your contributions to this package? > > d/copyrig

Re: Bug#383481: Must source code be easy to understand to fall under DFSG?

ive us better functionality in the end. The question is if it is a violation or not to release as is. The other good (or bad?) thing is that we would need cross-compilers for most major instruction-sets as reassembling probably mean compiling for a different architecture. Regards, // Ola > Frie

Re: Bug#383481: Must source code be easy to understand to fall under DFSG?

Hi Mathew (Anyone on debian-legal: please note and maintain the Cc:s) On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 04:26:38PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote: > On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 05:00:15PM +0100, Ola Lundqvist wrote: > > (Anyone on debian-legal: please note and maintain the Cc:s) > > > As yo

Re: Bug#383481: Must source code be easy to understand to fall under DFSG?

Hi Goswin Thanks for your response, and interesting new view (option C) on this matter. On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 02:20:44PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > Ola Lundqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: ...CUT... > > Let me take two examples: > > * Person A create a driver b

Must source code be easy to understand to fall under DFSG?

mage, how to move the arm while painting if we release an image as open source? I think this is worth considering. Personally I think this bug can be closed. Regards, // Ola -- ----- Ola Lundqvist --- / [EMAIL PROTECTED] Annebergssl

Re: [opal@debian.org: Re: Accepted mmake 2.2.1-4 (all source)]

Hello On Wed, Aug 18, 2004 at 12:53:37AM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > Ola Lundqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Well well. I assume of non-serious priority right? > > I did a random check of tree packages. 2 of them was correct and 1 did > > not inclu

What about NPL?

Hi I have a question: http://www.mozilla.org/MPL/MPL-1.1.txt Is this a ok license. Can it go to main or does it have to go to non-free/contrib? I'm not on the list so please cc me. :) Regards, // Ola -- ----- Ola Lundqvist --- / [EMAIL PROT

Java 1.3

d/etc? Regards, // Ola -- ----- Ola Lundqvist --- / [EMAIL PROTECTED] Björnkärrsgatan 5 A.11 \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED] 584 36 LINKÖPING | | +46 (0)13-17 69 83 +46 (0)70-332 1551 | |

ITP: lib-bsf-java

/opensource/license10.html // Ola I'm not a member of debian-legal so please keep it on debian-devel, or cc me, thanks. -- ----- Ola Lundqvist --- / [EMAIL PROTECTED] Björnkärrsgatan 5 A.11 \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED]