Steve Greenland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 31-Aug-01, 16:22 (CDT), Santiago Vila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Let's consider the following proposal:
> >
> > The GPL file in base-files should better be renamed to "GPL-2" and
> > GPL should be a symlink pointing to it.
> >
> > [ The p
On 31-Aug-01, 16:22 (CDT), Santiago Vila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Let's consider the following proposal:
>
> The GPL file in base-files should better be renamed to "GPL-2" and
> GPL should be a symlink pointing to it.
>
> [ The proposal is independent of whatever step may come afterwards
On Sat, 1 Sep 2001, Jakob B. Jensen wrote:
> Suppose package X is licensed under "GPL version 1 or later".
>
> As long as this text remains on the package, each recipient has
> the freedom to use it *at his/hers option* under GPL 1, 2 or 3
> (or later).
>
> Suppose by an act of packaging Debian li
Sorry for replying to this, I am not a DD, technically just a user.
I am not a lawyer either, so sorry for discussing licensing topics.
This e-mail is about freedom, not law.
On Fri, Aug 31, 2001 at 05:43:27PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
...
> "packages under `GPL or later' should refer to the lat
4 matches
Mail list logo
