Hi,
*Sigh*. I see we must persist in adding to the volume of
debian-devel.
>>"Marcus" == Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Marcus> On Sun, Aug 16, 1998 at 03:45:03PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> Stop lying, Marcus.
Marcus> I never did. Your words were very clear, an
Hi,
>>"Marcus" == Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Marcus> Hello,
Marcus> On Sun, Aug 16, 1998 at 02:11:38PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Marcus> Base-files contains the GPL for the whole distribution for
Marcus> practical reasons. It can't be removed from main without
Marcus>
On Sun, Aug 16, 1998 at 03:45:03PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Stop lying, Marcus.
I never did. Your words were very clear, and you repeated them multiple
times, there is no room for wrong interpretation.
I too encourage anyone to get the whole picture by reading the relevant
p
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> And I say we should not have the exception even for copyright
> documents. They should be in the verbatim section, on another CD, but
> in an required package, and with all indications that they are an
> integral part of Debian.
Oh, I agree, if we get verbatim, /
Hi,
Stop lying, Marcus. No one is infringing the copyright law. I
am just suggesting a reorganiztion of information in debian. No one
is going to stop shipping the GPL in debian, it just will be in a
different place on the archive.
You fail to mention that one way of appeasing
Hello,
On Sun, Aug 16, 1998 at 02:11:38PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Marcus> Base-files contains the GPL for the whole distribution for
> Marcus> practical reasons. It can't be removed from main without
> Marcus> breaking law.
>
> Rubbish. It can just as easily be moved to verbati
Hi,
>>"Marcus" == Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Marcus> Base-files contains the GPL for the whole distribution for
Marcus> practical reasons. It can't be removed from main without
Marcus> breaking law.
Rubbish. It can just as easily be moved to verbatim, and no
law is b
Hello,
[this mail is cross posted to debian-devel, as I think it is important for
other developers to know what mischief is going on here on debian-policy.
Follow up please to debian-policy. The whole thread can be read in
debian-policy, too]
Manoj wrote:
>And I say we should not have th
On Sun, Aug 16, 1998 at 07:49:59PM +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
>
> The proposal goes back to an idea by Raul Miller, I've seen it on some list,
> don't remember where.
Richard pointed out that it was him, so here is the mail I meant:
Richard Braakman:
> I don't think we can do that. Already
Hello,
I would suggest that we change dpkg to handle common files in different
packages that have the same md5sum. Dpkg could only install one copy, and
remove the last copy when the last package with this file is removed.
The proposal would solve the problem that we only ship one copy of the GP
Hello,
On Sun, Aug 16, 1998 at 11:33:22AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>
> No more so than standards. The GPL standas alone. Software
> authors can choose to use the GPL as the license under which to
> distribute their software.
>
> Standards stand alone. Software authors can ch
On 16 Aug 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Shipping the GPL as part of the package is the exception
> rather than the rule. and /usr/doc/copyright/GPL is a shipped
> standalone.
Shipping the GPL as part of the *source* package is the rule.
Since we have lots of GPLed packages it would be
On 16 Aug 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > We ship software with a copyright attached to it.
>
> On the contrary. Look at what ships /usr/doc/copyright/GPL.
> The package base-files ships the licenses un attached to software. [...]
Yes, but
Hi,
>>"Marcus" == Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Marcus> :) Yes, well, this is why I want vendors to ship the non-free stuff
on a
Marcus> seperate CD.
Marcus> The point is, you will never be allowed to remopve the
Marcus> copyright notices. For example, you'll never be allowe
Hi,
>>"Marcus" == Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Marcus> Hello Manoj and everyone,
>> I think it is a bad decision to stop shipping the FSSTND in main.
Marcus> Wasn't it your suggestion to make "main" as modificable as
Marcus> possible? Or do you mean "Debian" here instead mai
Hi,
>>"Joey" == Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Joey> Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> Because I think that it is in the interests of Debian to
>> distribute even verbatim documents as part of the
>> distribtution. Remember, we havbe not even covered teh other sets of
>> verbatim documents (p
Hi,
>>"Jules" == Jules Bean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Jules> This summary won't be as professional looking as Manoj's are, but I want
Jules> to condense a few points:
Jules> 1) Free standards are desirable
Jules> We seem to more or less all agree on this.
Jules> 2) Non-free, but still dist
Hi,
>>"Marcus" == Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Marcus> Maybe it helps if I rephrase. I think that it does not make
Marcus> sense to talk about stand alone licenses (and you are talking
Marcus> about stand alone licenses), because we don't ship them. We
Marcus> ship software wit
This summary won't be as professional looking as Manoj's are, but I want
to condense a few points:
1) Free standards are desirable
We seem to more or less all agree on this.
2) Non-free, but still distributable standards, should be distributed
The value to debian of including the standards it f
On Sat, Aug 15, 1998 at 11:30:11PM -0700, Joey Hess wrote:
> Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> > Because I think that it is in the interests of Debian to
> > distribute even verbatim documents as part of the
> > distribtution. Remember, we havbe not even covered teh other sets of
> > verbatim docume
On Sat, Aug 15, 1998 at 10:26:52PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >>"Marcus" == Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Marcus> [...]
> >> > This would essentially be a free+(name change, remove non-technical
> part)
> >> > copyright, and it is exactly that what is already granted by
Hello Manoj and everyone,
I concede that we can't be sure under which circumstances we are allowed to
derive from a copyright license, without major legal assistance. I thnk this
argumentation is obsolete anyway (and more about at the end of this mail).
On Sat, Aug 15, 1998 at 03:10:13PM -0500,
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Because I think that it is in the interests of Debian to
> distribute even verbatim documents as part of the
> distribtution. Remember, we havbe not even covered teh other sets of
> verbatim documents (personal opinions, stories, amgzines, graphic
> novels). It i
Hi,
>>"Guy" == Guy Maor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Guy> Looks good. The only changes I suggest are:
>> +If the issue raised is especially contentous, or is deemed to be
>> +suitable for review by the full set of developers, then four or more
>> +developers can call for a hold on
Hi,
>>"Marcus" == Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Marcus> [...]
>> > This would essentially be a free+(name change, remove non-technical part)
>> > copyright, and it is exactly that what is already granted by law. It is
>> > not
>> > necessary to include all permissions already
25 matches
Mail list logo
