I tracked down the reason why selecting nothing on the glimpse search
resulted in a blank page.
Basicly, the "year" being returned is not Y2K (it returned 100, not 00) and
so it was looking for a -10004 type directory instead of -0004 problem
has been corrected on master. I do not know if the
On Wed, May 31, 2000 at 10:24:26AM -0600, Anthony Fok wrote:
> Just so that you know, the *.html of removed pages such as
> /devel/release_info.wml are still accessible on www.debian.org,
> e.g. http://www.debian.org/devel/release_info. Perhaps they could be
> purged? And what about those of othe
I found this on debian-www list.
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
at "Mon, 29 May 2000 13:59:02 +0200",
Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > While a quick grep of debian-changes for this month and April for
> > "security" finds:
>
> Lets ignore all the ones from potato and woody, we don't
> And doesn't their use of the Debian logo break the license?
I'd say yes. The logo license says:
: Debian Open Use Logo License
:
: Copyright (c) 1999 Software in the Public Interest
:
: This logo or a modified version may be used by anyone to refer to
: the Debian project, but does not indi
Andrew Weiss wrote:
> So can we forward Debian's license page to them and demand removal?
At least the respect of the license (probably refer back to the
original and use the same license; they can't really decide to
copy our stuff and change the license in it!)
> What exactly can be done about
Joey Hess:
> http://www.491.org/projets/api/
> Shocking.
And when stealing the HTML code, they even forgot to remove the reference
to [EMAIL PROTECTED] as the creator.
And doesn't their use of the Debian logo break the license?
--
\\//
peter - http://www.softwolves.pp.se/
Statement concerni
Title: RE: complete clone of the debian website
So can we forward Debian's license page to them and demand removal? What exactly can be done about people with no creativity whatsoever?
Andrew
---
Big Endian Girls make the RISCen world go round
On Wed, May 31, 2000 at 09:56:54PM +0900, Taketoshi Sano wrote:
> > Therefore, I have taken the liberty to update the web pages accordingly.
> > Editing the translations was quite simple, I don't think anything went
> > wrong, except perhaps for he Japanese translation, I really can't parse it
> >
On Wed, May 31, 2000 at 02:10:34PM +0300, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
> > The `modified BSD license' doesn't exist anymore -- the modification has
> > been included in the new version of the `ordinary' BSD license. If you're
> > running potato, look at /usr/share/common-licenses/BSD file, notice
Joey Hess wrote:
> http://www.491.org/projets/api/
>
> Shocking.
Also see their license link at the bottom!
http://www.491.org/projets/api/license.html
: License
:
: Copyright © 1997-1998 Application Programming Interface (API_France)
: 06 rue des Petits Hôtels
: 75010 Paris
http://www.491.org/projets/api/
Shocking.
--
see shy jo
Hello,
Just so that you know, the *.html of removed pages such as
/devel/release_info.wml are still accessible on www.debian.org,
e.g. http://www.debian.org/devel/release_info. Perhaps they could be
purged? And what about those of other translations?
Cheers,
Anthony
--
Anthony Fok Tung-Ling
Hi. I found you (joy) already changed the Japanese translation of
intro/free.wml. So I don't need to do anything on that file.
Thanks.
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
at "31 May 2000 21:56:54 +0900",
with "Re: the modified BSD license is no more",
Taketoshi Sano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I check
Hi.
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
at Tue, 30 May 2000 23:39:06 +0200,
Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The `modified BSD license' doesn't exist anymore -- the modification has
> been included in the new version of the `ordinary' BSD license. If you're
> running potato, look at /usr/
On Tue, May 30, 2000 at 11:39:06PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
> Hi people,
>
> The `modified BSD license' doesn't exist anymore -- the modification has
> been included in the new version of the `ordinary' BSD license. If you're
> running potato, look at /usr/share/common-licenses/BSD file, notice h
Josip Rodin:
> Please check it out (intro/free.wml and intro/license_disc.wml) and
> correct any errors I may have done.
Speaking of which, is anyone planning on finishing and linking to the
license_disc page?
--
\\//
peter - http://www.softwolves.pp.se/
Statement concerning unsolicited e-ma
On Tue, May 30, 2000 at 11:10:38PM -0500, w trillich wrote:
> > Getting a new search engine is something that should be highly prioritized,
> > yes. However, I don't see the need for having entry fields on all pages,
> > especially since we have the "Search" link on each page.
>
> ...which brings
17 matches
Mail list logo
