On Mon, Jun 09, 2003 at 12:31:36PM +0200, Mathieu Roy wrote:
> Rudy, if I were you, I would suggest user to submit with a more usual
> license or to ask [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The user his program is under the GPL, but it uses a wordlist that
isn't under a GPL compatible license.
> It takes time to ge
Hugo Gayosso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Rudy Gevaert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Thanks for your input :), somebody else want to give a third
> > opininion?
>
> [...]
>
> I would suggest to send it to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Rudy, if I were you, I would suggest user to submit with a more u
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Rudy Gevaert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thanks for your input :), somebody else want to give a third
> opininion?
[...]
I would suggest to send it to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Greetings,
- --
Hugo Gayosso
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG
On Thu, Jun 05, 2003 at 11:42:05AM +0200, Mathieu Roy wrote:
> To me, there is problem there.
> This word-list is free software but GPL incompatible. The GPL does not
> restrict financial return.
> You can make money with GPLed software, not with this word-list.
>
> Solution (IMHO):
> -
Rudy Gevaert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> A project that has been submitted uses a word list that is under the
> following license. I think it is "free software", but I would like to
> have a second opininion. Also the project itself is released under
> the GPL. Is this ok?
To me, there is prob
