> IIUC, the argument stated is that Non-GNU Savannah packages might
> some-day become GNU packages.
No, the point is more like it was expressed: for GNU packages to
borrow any parts of code or documentation from other packages,
the licensing must be compatible.
That is a very weak
[1:text/plain Hide]
Hi Alfred,
At 2024-11-12T11:29:54-0500, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
>No, the point is more like it was expressed: for GNU packages to
>borrow any parts of code or documentation from other packages,
>the licensing must be compatible.
>
> That
On Mon, Nov 11, 2024 at 11:19:49AM -0600, Corwin Brust wrote:
>
> I think it is more to the point that program authors submitting to
> Savannah are not choosing the GFDL - we are pressuring them to do so.
I don't think we really do---no more than we are pressuring them
to choose the GPL for progr
Hi Alfred,
At 2024-11-12T11:29:54-0500, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
>No, the point is more like it was expressed: for GNU packages to
>borrow any parts of code or documentation from other packages,
>the licensing must be compatible.
>
> That is a very weak claim, for one we require copyri
