Francesco Poli wrote:
> As Joe Smith has just explained in more detail, one of the two license
> versions includes a more specific requirement to embed a verbatim
> sentence in user documentation: I cannot find any such restriction in
> the GNU LGPL v2.1...
I was looking at the December 2001 vers
On Sun, 29 Mar 2009 15:43:14 +0100 MJ Ray wrote:
> Francesco Poli wrote:
> > On Tue, 24 Mar 2009 14:54:00 + MJ Ray wrote:
> > [...]
> > > What extra restrictions? The exceptions looked like actual
> > > exceptions, assuming that "identify their use of FLTK" is in the
> > > LGPL-2.1... which i
"Giacomo A. Catenazzi" wrote in message
news:49c8da6f.7050...@debian.org...
4. You do not have to provide a copy of the FLTK license
with programs that are linked to the FLTK library, nor
do you have to identify the FLTK license in your
program or docume
Francesco Poli wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Mar 2009 14:54:00 + MJ Ray wrote:
> [...]
> > What extra restrictions? The exceptions looked like actual
> > exceptions, assuming that "identify their use of FLTK" is in the
> > LGPL-2.1... which it appears to be, in section 1.
>
> Could you please elaborate
On Tue, 24 Mar 2009 14:54:00 + MJ Ray wrote:
[...]
> What extra restrictions? The exceptions looked like actual
> exceptions, assuming that "identify their use of FLTK" is in the
> LGPL-2.1... which it appears to be, in section 1.
Could you please elaborate on this?
I cannot find any require
In message <20090324232043.2789e...@pcolivier.chezmoi.net>, Olive
writes
Any derivative work is covered by the FLTK license and that include the
additional permissions. It is my understanding that you cannot change
the license at all unless it is explicitly permitted and I do not fin
otherwise it is a
copyright infringement). The way it is presented is not you have all
the right from the LGPL + additional permission but the license is the
following FLTK license which consists of a modified LGPL license. The
additional permissions make part of the license.
Sorry, but I currently disagr
works you need a license (otherwise it is a
> > copyright infringement). The way it is presented is not you have all
> > the right from the LGPL + additional permission but the license is
> > the following FLTK license which consists of a modified LGPL
> > license. The additional permiss
presented is not you have all
> the right from the LGPL + additional permission but the license is the
> following FLTK license which consists of a modified LGPL license. The
> additional permissions make part of the license.
Sorry, but I currently disagree with that view. Who is Olive?
&
On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 09:56:06 +1100
Ben Finney wrote:
> "Giacomo A. Catenazzi" writes:
>
> > === FLTK License, May 2001 ===
> > FLTK License
> > Ammended May 4, 2001
> >
> > The following
"Giacomo A. Catenazzi" writes:
> === FLTK License, May 2001 ===
> FLTK License
> Ammended May 4, 2001
>
> The following ammendments to the GNU Library General Public
> License apply for the FLTK library:
>
>
works you need a license (otherwise it is a
copyright infringement). The way it is presented is not you have all
the right from the LGPL + additional permission but the license is the
following FLTK license which consists of a modified LGPL license. The
additional permissions make part of the
Olive wrote:
> If I understand it well; the amendments of the LGPL are not removable
> (it is not explicitly said to be removable so by default it is not).
> But It seems then that this license might in fact be incompatible with
> the LPGL.
They appear to be additional permissions, so are GPL-com
On Tue, 24 Mar 2009 14:54:00 +
MJ Ray wrote:
> "Giacomo A. Catenazzi" wrote: [...]
> > - It seems it to fail the "desert island" test
>
> This is not in itself a problem, but usually suggests it fails DFSG 1,
> 3, 5, 6 and/or 7 in some combinatio
"Giacomo A. Catenazzi" wrote: [...]
> - It seems it to fail the "desert island" test
This is not in itself a problem, but usually suggests it fails DFSG 1,
3, 5, 6 and/or 7 in some combination.
However, the FLTK License only *requests* contribution. It does not
re
Hello list!
I'm sponsoring the libflkt2, but I've some troubles with
the FLTK licenses [included at the end of this message].
The "FLTK License, May 2001" is included in the proposed
libfltk2, and the "FLTK License, December 2001" is
already included in Debian, in
16 matches
Mail list logo
