our word for that. I haven't done an analysis of non-free in quite a
> while, so there may very well be some binary only packages. I had assumed
> that we resolved such issues with installer programs, and that source is
> certainly available.
Netscape would be the ca
re restrictive license than some of
the things in non-free).
Really, I don't want to start a flamewar on this. But I don't think
that trying to convince the W3C to relicense their specs is a
worthwhile use of our time.
sam th
[EMAIL
On Thu, Mar 08, 2001 at 12:27:03AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 11:03:48PM -0600, Sam TH wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 10:31:00PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > > mpg123MPEG layer 1/2/3 audio player
> > >
>
our word for that. I haven't done an analysis of non-free in quite a
> while, so there may very well be some binary only packages. I had assumed
> that we resolved such issues with installer programs, and that source is
> certainly available.
Netscape would be the ca
re restrictive license than some of
the things in non-free).
Really, I don't want to start a flamewar on this. But I don't think
that trying to convince the W3C to relicense their specs is a
worthwhile use of our time.
sam th
[EMAIL
On Thu, Mar 08, 2001 at 12:27:03AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 11:03:48PM -0600, Sam TH wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 10:31:00PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > > mpg123MPEG layer 1/2/3 audio player
> > >
>
6 matches
Mail list logo
