[task #16050] Submission of the Quirk browser

Update of task #16050 (project administration): Status: In Progress => Cancelled ___ Follow-up Comment #11: Please check our requirements carefully again, fix your issues, and make a new request.

[task #16050] Submission of the Quirk browser

Follow-up Comment #10, task #16050 (project administration): Hello once again. I decided to read about the GPL more carefully, and I wanted to say that I think I had misunderstood what it means to be a “GPL‐compatible license”. >From what I was able to gather, contrary to my previous understandin

[task #16050] Submission of the Quirk browser

Update of task #16050 (project administration): Open/Closed:Open => Closed ___ Follow-up Comment #9: Cancelling. ___ Reply to this

[task #16050] Submission of the Quirk browser

Follow-up Comment #8, task #16050 (project administration): [comment #7 comment #7:] > In my case, the only parts of the program that are GPL‐licensed are written by me, and I’m almost certaint that the GPL cannot constrain me from distributing my program in any way, because I wrote it myself. Qu

[task #16050] Submission of the Quirk browser

Follow-up Comment #7, task #16050 (project administration): [comment #6 comment #6:] > This isn't correct. It doesn't matter whether I link the binaries myself or leave that for my users, > https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#NonfreeDriverKernelLinux I see. In my case, the only parts of th

[task #16050] Submission of the Quirk browser

Follow-up Comment #6, task #16050 (project administration): [comment #5 comment #5:] > From my understanding, it is possible for a project distributed under the GPL to use GPL‐incompatible libraries, the same way that a GPL‐incompatible program may have dependencies distributed under the GPL (as l

[task #16050] Submission of the Quirk browser

Follow-up Comment #5, task #16050 (project administration): >From my understanding, it is possible for a project distributed under the GPL to use GPL‐incompatible libraries, the same way that a GPL‐incompatible program may have dependencies distributed under the GPL (as long as people don’t distri

[task #16050] Submission of the Quirk browser

Follow-up Comment #4, task #16050 (project administration): [comment #3 comment #3:] > I see. Do you think it would be enough if I removed the file from the package? Yes. > Once I do remove the file, are there any other problems I should also look into? You are right. You say that your package

[task #16050] Submission of the Quirk browser

Follow-up Comment #3, task #16050 (project administration): I see. Do you think it would be enough if I removed the file from the package? (It is only documentation, so removing it wouldn’t affect the project otherwise.) Once I do remove the file, are there any other problems I should also look in

[task #16050] Submission of the Quirk browser

Update of task #16050 (project administration): Status:None => In Progress Assigned to:None => ineiev ___ Follow-up Comment #2: The Free Ar

[task #16050] Submission of the Quirk browser

Follow-up Comment #1, task #16050 (project administration): For the sake of completion, I should note that standard C tools and libraries are also necessary dependencies. I have used GCC and glibc in my experimentations with Quirk, which are both GNU projects distributed under the GPL and the LGPL

[task #16050] Submission of the Quirk browser

URL: Summary: Submission of the Quirk browser Project: Savannah Administration Submitted by: zamfofex Submitted on: Wed 29 Sep 2021 04:14:06 AM UTC Should Start On: Wed 29 Sep 2021 12:00: