Le Tue, Apr 17, 2007 at 03:59:08PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode a écrit :
>
> Alternate suggested GR text:
> ---
> The Debian Project notes that many license texts are copyrighted works,
> licensed
> only under meta-licenses which prohibit the creation of derivative license
>
MJ Ray wrote:
>There may be a few licences that are buggy about this and to which we
>want to grant a limited-time exception, but that is not unusual. Use
>a GR for only that, not a permanent foundation document edit.
>> Care to craft another solution? [...]
>No, I've no interest
You just did cr
On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 09:51:15 +0100 (BST) MJ Ray wrote:
> Francesco Poli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 09:11:52 +0100 (BST) MJ Ray wrote: [...]
> > > Has it? I've seen a few people write down this assumption, but
> > > I've usually disagreed with them.
> >
> > I'm afraid you then th
alles frei und kostenlos , nur für
erwachsene. amateure, profi , bilder und videos:
http://www.porn-reactor.de.vu
Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [GPL/LGPL addressed in an earlier thread.]
> The Academic Free License does not have
> permission to modify. The LaTeX Project Public License does not have
> permission to modify.
I think AFL is not a DFSG-free licence because of its excessive
Mutua
Francesco Poli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 09:11:52 +0100 (BST) MJ Ray wrote: [...]
> > Has it? I've seen a few people write down this assumption, but I've
> > usually disagreed with them.
>
> I'm afraid you then think that you have to purge every GPLv2 preamble
> from Debian main.
6 matches
Mail list logo
