On 06/23/10 07:05 PM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
On Jun 23, 2010, at 10:43 AM, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
IANAL, but I doubt that is true in all cases.
I was leaving this distinction out to simplicity the discussion--the
Sage codebase is v2+, which can be mixed with v3+.
OK. I thought you were ta
On Jun 23, 2010, at 10:43 AM, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
On 06/23/10 05:49 PM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
(v2 code can be used in a v3 project, but not the other
way around).
- Robert
IANAL, but I doubt that is true in all cases.
I was leaving this distinction out to simplicity the discussion--t
On 06/23/10 05:49 PM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
(v2 code can be used in a v3 project, but not the other
way around).
- Robert
IANAL, but I doubt that is true in all cases.
If someone says the code is "GPL 2", then I don't believe you can necessarily
use it in GLP 3 software.
http://www.gnu.o
On Jun 23, 2010, at 6:44 AM, v...@ukr.net wrote:
Hello!
On Tue, 22 Jun 2010 18:45:43 -0700
William Stein wrote:
...
The core Sage library, since we control it and many people don't like
GPL3 so much.
Excuse me for interrupting a technical discussion, but I just wanted
to ask what is wrong
> Excuse me for interrupting a technical discussion, but I just wanted
> to ask what is wrong with licensing Sage under GPLv3? Sage is a free
> software, am I right. I thought that all GPLs are for free software and
> that all of them do guarantee freedom to use and modify the software.
For one,
Hello!
On Tue, 22 Jun 2010 18:45:43 -0700
William Stein wrote:
> ...
> The core Sage library, since we control it and many people don't like
> GPL3 so much.
>
Excuse me for interrupting a technical discussion, but I just wanted
to ask what is wrong with licensing Sage under GPLv3? Sage is a
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 6:40 PM, Dr. David Kirkby
wrote:
> On 06/23/10 02:35 AM, William Stein wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 6:33 PM, Dr. David Kirkby
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> There seems to be an agreement to include GLPK, but as I noted elsewhere,
>>> the package does not build properly on 64-
On 06/23/10 02:35 AM, William Stein wrote:
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 6:33 PM, Dr. David Kirkby
wrote:
There seems to be an agreement to include GLPK, but as I noted elsewhere,
the package does not build properly on 64-bit Solaris, as the right compiler
flag (-m64) does not get added. Robert crea
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 6:33 PM, Dr. David Kirkby
wrote:
> There seems to be an agreement to include GLPK, but as I noted elsewhere,
> the package does not build properly on 64-bit Solaris, as the right compiler
> flag (-m64) does not get added. Robert created a ticket for this.
Thanks so much fo
There seems to be an agreement to include GLPK, but as I noted elsewhere, the
package does not build properly on 64-bit Solaris, as the right compiler flag
(-m64) does not get added. Robert created a ticket for this.
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/9312
The spkg-install and SPKG.txt
10 matches
Mail list logo
