On Wednesday 10 September 2003 07:52 am, Terry Hancock wrote:
> On Wednesday 10 September 2003 01:01 am, John Lightsey wrote:
> > The problem with this package (commercial music, sounds, graphics and
> > levels used without any license) isn't something I'd picture anyone on
> > Debian-Legal defendi
On Wednesday 10 September 2003 07:52 am, Terry Hancock wrote:
> On Wednesday 10 September 2003 01:01 am, John Lightsey wrote:
> > The problem with this package (commercial music, sounds, graphics and
> > levels used without any license) isn't something I'd picture anyone on
> > Debian-Legal defendi
On Wednesday 10 September 2003 01:01 am, John Lightsey wrote:
> The problem with this package (commercial music, sounds, graphics and levels
> used without any license) isn't something I'd picture anyone on Debian-Legal
> defending. It shouldn't have made its into Debian in the first place.
Are
On Wednesday 10 September 2003 01:01 am, John Lightsey wrote:
> The problem with this package (commercial music, sounds, graphics and levels
> used without any license) isn't something I'd picture anyone on Debian-Legal
> defending. It shouldn't have made its into Debian in the first place.
Are
On Tuesday 09 September 2003 11:34 pm, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> No. We don't hide problems. If you expect help, expect it to be given in
> public fora. Section 2.3 is a little broad for us to be able to guess what
> the problem is and give specific advice.
To be honest, I wasn't trying to hide t
On Tue, Sep 09, 2003 at 01:20:26PM -0500, John Lightsey wrote:
> A while back I ITA'd the rocks-n-diamonds package. After talking with the
> upstream maintainer I realized this package can't be included in Debian
> without heavy modification of the upstream version. I'm not going to say
> exac
On Tuesday 09 September 2003 11:34 pm, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> No. We don't hide problems. If you expect help, expect it to be given in
> public fora. Section 2.3 is a little broad for us to be able to guess what
> the problem is and give specific advice.
To be honest, I wasn't trying to hide t
On Tue, Sep 09, 2003 at 01:20:26PM -0500, John Lightsey wrote:
> A while back I ITA'd the rocks-n-diamonds package. After talking with the
> upstream maintainer I realized this package can't be included in Debian
> without heavy modification of the upstream version. I'm not going to say
> exac
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
John Lightsey wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> A while back I ITA'd the rocks-n-diamonds package. After talking with the
> upstream maintainer I realized this package can't be included in Debian
> without heavy modification of the upstream version.
Please f
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
John Lightsey wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> A while back I ITA'd the rocks-n-diamonds package. After talking with the
> upstream maintainer I realized this package can't be included in Debian
> without heavy modification of the upstream version.
Please f
Hi there,
A while back I ITA'd the rocks-n-diamonds package. After talking with the
upstream maintainer I realized this package can't be included in Debian
without heavy modification of the upstream version. I'm not going to say
exactly what the problem is here, but it definitely doesn't meet
Hi there,
A while back I ITA'd the rocks-n-diamonds package. After talking with the
upstream maintainer I realized this package can't be included in Debian
without heavy modification of the upstream version. I'm not going to say
exactly what the problem is here, but it definitely doesn't meet
12 matches
Mail list logo
