Re: OpenSSL, SUN and ECC (patent issue)

2002-10-14 Thread Anthony DeRobertis
On Sat, 2002-10-12 at 12:47, Branden Robinson wrote: > See, this is why I'm an atheist. But I have proof! I have pictures! http://armiesofdarkness.com/images/angel-small.jpg ;-) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: Regarding linux-kernel-conf and Qt

2002-10-14 Thread Henning Makholm
Scripsit Jeff Licquia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Congratulations on making the front page of Slashdot. It seems that you're referring to but I don't see any comments about Qt licensing there. > Since Debian was one of the prim

Moscow ML (mosml) not even allowed in non-free?

2002-10-14 Thread Jens Peter Secher
I have provided an unofficial deb package[1] of Moscow ML (an ML compiler) for some time now, but it has licensing problems. According[2] to Torsten Landschoff, there was a discussion of this matter on this list, but I cannot seem to find it. Is there anyone who can give me pointers to the discus

Re: Regarding linux-kernel-conf and Qt

2002-10-14 Thread Jeff Licquia
On Mon, 2002-10-14 at 08:05, Henning Makholm wrote: > Scripsit Jeff Licquia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Congratulations on making the front page of Slashdot. > > It seems that you're referring to > > but I don't see any comm

Re: Moscow ML (mosml) not even allowed in non-free?

2002-10-14 Thread Andreas Metzler
Jens Peter Secher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have provided an unofficial deb package[1] of Moscow ML (an ML > compiler) for some time now, but it has licensing problems. > > According[2] to Torsten Landschoff, there was a discussion of this > matter on this list, but I cannot seem to find it.

Re: Moscow ML (mosml) not even allowed in non-free?

2002-10-14 Thread Henning Makholm
Scripsit Andreas Metzler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Jens Peter Secher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I have provided an unofficial deb package[1] of Moscow ML (an ML > > compiler) for some time now, but it has licensing problems. > > According[2] to Torsten Landschoff, there was a discussion of this

Re: Regarding linux-kernel-conf and Qt

2002-10-14 Thread Henning Makholm
Scripsit Jeff Licquia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > On Mon, 2002-10-14 at 08:05, Henning Makholm wrote: > > What? If there ever was a "anti-Qt movement", Debian has certainly not > > been a "prime mover" behind it. > Well, perhaps "anti-Qt" was a poor choice of words. My point was that > Debian was one

Re: Regarding linux-kernel-conf and Qt

2002-10-14 Thread Branden Robinson
On Mon, Oct 14, 2002 at 03:05:19PM +0200, Henning Makholm wrote: > Debian has simply refrained from distributing some programs which had > code covered by the GPL yet linked to Qt at a time where distributing > such programs would have been illegal. /me wearily makes his plea for reason and sanity

Re: Regarding linux-kernel-conf and Qt

2002-10-14 Thread Henning Makholm
Scripsit Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > On Mon, Oct 14, 2002 at 03:05:19PM +0200, Henning Makholm wrote: > > Debian has simply refrained from distributing some programs which had > > code covered by the GPL yet linked to Qt at a time where distributing > > such programs would have been ill

GUADAGNARE DAVVERO, LEGGI E CAPIRAI !!!!!

2002-10-14 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]
FAI ATTENZIONE PERCHE' CON QUESTO SISTEMA GUADAGNI DAVVERO ! (se il messaggio vi e' arrivato piu volte scusate ma, …leggetelo…..) Vorresti Davvero Guadagnare con Internet? Bene, la prima cosa da fare è salvare su disco questa pagina per averla a portata di mano anche se il tuo PC no

Re: Regarding linux-kernel-conf and Qt

2002-10-14 Thread Anthony DeRobertis
On Mon, 2002-10-14 at 14:36, Branden Robinson wrote: > Copyright infringement is historically a tort, not a crime. /me points out that what is historically true doesn't matter much if the people with more guns decide otherwise. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part