> Ask upstream for clarification.
Ok. Is there a french mentor in the list who sangs to manage this ? I can help
but as I'm not a debian guru I'm afraid not to to be able to ask the good
questions and get the wrong answers.
If you drive me, I can write a letter to ask for specific clarificati
On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 08:18:06AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> the essence of my conclusion in 2012 was: “in doubt, ask Upstream”. Sorry
> that
> it was not clear. Also, if after reading the email of Jonathan Keller in the
> same thread you still have no doubts, go ahead with you
Le Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 11:21:24AM -0400, Paul Tagliamonte a écrit :
>
> I'll of course defer to Charles' ability to understand french, so
> working from the English translation (which is to say, I might be
> missing something), I don't see the same issues he does.
>
> Both the ISC and MIT/Expat
On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 04:03:26PM +0200, Eric Maeker wrote:
> Thanks Guido,
>
> I've read the thread. I think we should include this complex discussion
> inside the Debian wiki.
>
> If I've clearly understood, a package that would contain any data with
> this licence would not be elligible to th
Le 11/07/2014 15:33, Guido van Steen a écrit :
> Hi Eric,
>
> It looks like your question has been discussed before:
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2012/12/msg00020.html
>
> In the thread Charles Plessy argues that the licence seems to lack the
> right to "disseminate modified informatio
Hi Eric,
It looks like your question has been discussed before:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2012/12/msg00020.html
In the thread Charles Plessy argues that the licence seems to lack the
right to "disseminate modified information", which would make it
non-free from a Debian perspective. C
Dear Mentors,
I'd like to include in a GPLv3 / LGPL2.1 application some data extracted
from a french OpenData website.
I can't find the licence in the Debian compatible licences:
https://wiki.debian.org/DFSGLicenses
Can you please state about this licence:
http://wiki.data.gouv.fr/imag
Ok, thanks a lot for your answers.
Best regards,
--
Elías
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110520192329.GA10215@debianero
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 06:38:54PM -0400, Luke Faraone wrote:
> On 05/18/2011 02:15 PM, Elías Alejandro wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > I want your advices about a package that requires in its new
> > upstream release, as build dependency: libcurl4-openssl-dev
> > Previous releases was built with libcurl4-
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 06:18:17PM -0500, Elías Alejandro wrote:
> > If you link against code which links against OpenSSL, IANAL, but I think
> > you also need to have the exception in your own code.
> So you mean add this exception in debian/copyright?
No, you can't change the upstream license. I
2011/5/18 Elías Alejandro :
> On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 06:38:54PM -0400, Luke Faraone wrote:
>> If you link against code which links against OpenSSL, IANAL, but I think
>> you also need to have the exception in your own code.
>>
> So you mean add this exception in debian/copyright? according[1] poin
Hi,
First, thanks for your answer.
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 06:38:54PM -0400, Luke Faraone wrote:
> If you link against code which links against OpenSSL, IANAL, but I think
> you also need to have the exception in your own code.
>
So you mean add this exception in debian/copyright? according[1] p
On 05/18/2011 02:15 PM, Elías Alejandro wrote:
> Hi all,
> I want your advices about a package that requires in its new
> upstream release, as build dependency: libcurl4-openssl-dev
> Previous releases was built with libcurl4-gnutls-dev and packaging
> under GPL-3.
> So, If there any licence issue
Hi all,
I want your advices about a package that requires in its new
upstream release, as build dependency: libcurl4-openssl-dev
Previous releases was built with libcurl4-gnutls-dev and packaging
under GPL-3.
So, If there any licence issue if it is compiled with libcurl4-openssl-dev
instead of lib
George Bonser writes:
> Because if they try to sell SuperCahsier E-Commerce Solutions to people
> they will also have to provide them with the source code ... which means
> that the purchaser can in turn resell it at a lower cost. As long as they
> are selling the SERVICE they are safe.
No they ar
George Bonser writes:
> So you sell them the binary for $250,000 but license it under GPL. This
> means that if they EVER provide ANYONE a binary, they also must provide
> the source code. This is a strong deterrant that will likely prevent them
> from ever redistributing the binary (to keep the so
Shaleh wrote:
> > 5. For commercial use of this software, you may charge for the
> >installation and/or management, but not for the software
> >itself. Usage in a commercial service must display the
> >copyright prominently.
>
> GPL says you may charge for media, not the software,
Shaleh wrote:
[MajorCool license]
> This is like the artistic license perl uses, and the whole license in general
> is similar.
>
> Permission to redistribute is needed though, do not see him being against
> this.
Okay, thanks for your help (and the help from others). I sent the upstream
auth
On 19-Feb-99 Remco van de Meent wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Would this license (the one that comes with MajorCool, a webinterface to the
> Majordomo package) fit in non-free? I think so, right?
Actually sounds ok to me.
>
> ---
> THE "NO-FRILLS"
On Fri, Feb 19, 1999 at 01:59:30PM +0100, Remco van de Meent wrote:
> Would this license (the one that comes with MajorCool, a webinterface to the
> Majordomo package) fit in non-free? I think so, right?
It sure can go to non-free, but what about main? Look:
> 4. Non-commercial use of this softwa
On Fri, 19 Feb 1999, Remco van de Meent wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Would this license (the one that comes with MajorCool, a webinterface to the
> Majordomo package) fit in non-free? I think so, right?
>
> ---
> THE "NO-FRILLS" LICENSING AGREEMENT
Hi,
Would this license (the one that comes with MajorCool, a webinterface to the
Majordomo package) fit in non-free? I think so, right?
---
THE "NO-FRILLS" LICENSING AGREEMENT
1. This software is copyright the author and NCR Corp.
2. Ma
22 matches
Mail list logo
