On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 02:17:12PM +1100, Craig Small wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 02:19:38PM -0500, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> > Even considering code in the same jarfile as "linked", I don't think
> > you can link an image to code in the same way.
> I've seen it before. Takes an image and make
On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 02:19:38PM -0500, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> Even considering code in the same jarfile as "linked", I don't think
> you can link an image to code in the same way.
I've seen it before. Takes an image and makes a C file, something like
char my_img={ 0x11, 0x22, ... etc}
Was ev
On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 08:01:13PM +0100, Eric Lavarde - Debian wrote:
> I guess, it means that having the icons in a jar file isn't OK, having
> them in the file system is OK
Jar files are .zip files. Does this mean that you can't have images in
the same tarball as a GPL'd program in a tarfile?
==> I'm not sure what my (tablet) mailer did with my initial posting, but
you might have got it garbled, hence I apologize and send it again. Eric
Hi,
I would tend to agree with what Paul wrote but IANAL and you should ask on
debian-legal for a more authoritative answer. A few more comments below
Hi,
I would tend to agree with what Paul wrote but IANAL and you should ask on
debian-legal for a more authoritative answer.
A few more comments below:
Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
>On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 07:36:42PM +0100, Felix Natter wrote:
>> (upstream) Freeplane 1.3.x will have new icons (appli
On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 07:36:42PM +0100, Felix Natter wrote:
> (upstream) Freeplane 1.3.x will have new icons (application icon,
> document icon), but the artist wants to keep all rights and only grant
> the Freeplane project all rights of use.
> --> Is that ok for Debian?
Not for Debian main, n
On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 4:15 PM, Gergely Nagy wrote:
>> --> Is it even compatible with the GPL-2+ license of Freeplane?
>
> It's early in the morning, but my gut feeling is that no, it would not
> be compatible.
Why not? It's not uncommon for an upstream to give their code and
their art/data ass
Felix Natter writes:
> (upstream) Freeplane 1.3.x will have new icons (application icon,
> document icon), but the artist wants to keep all rights and only grant
> the Freeplane project all rights of use.
> --> Is that ok for Debian?
No, it's not. See DFSG#1, #7, and possibly #8 too. But mostly
Dear mentors,
(upstream) Freeplane 1.3.x will have new icons (application icon,
document icon), but the artist wants to keep all rights and only grant
the Freeplane project all rights of use.
--> Is that ok for Debian?
--> Is it even compatible with the GPL-2+ license of Freeplane?
Thanks and Hap
9 matches
Mail list logo
