On Tue, 2021-05-25 at 19:57 +0200, Evert Vorster wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 25 May 2021 at 19:27, Manhong Dai via aur-general <
> aur-general@lists.archlinux.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, 2021-05-25 at 19:04 +0200, alad via aur-general wrote:
> > > On 25/05/2021 18:58
On Tue, 2021-05-25 at 19:04 +0200, alad via aur-general wrote:
> On 25/05/2021 18:58, Antoine Viallon via aur-general wrote:
> > 25 mai 2021 16:42 "Genes Lists via aur-general" <
> > aur-general@lists.archlinux.org> a écrit:
> >
> > > As an outside observer of this thread, it seems like the time
On Tue, 2021-05-25 at 16:11 +0200, Damjan Georgievski wrote:
> > Unfortunately it still uses the original code. Here is my test.
> >
> > $ diff -U0 <(seq 900 1000) <(seq 900 1000 | sed -e "s/999//"
> > )
> > --- /dev/fd/63 2021-05-25 09:57:37.954088656 -0400
> > +++ /dev/fd/62 2021-05
On Tue, 2021-05-25 at 12:56 +, Antoine Viallon via aur-general
wrote:
> 24 mai 2021 09:11 "Miguel Revilla Rodríguez via aur-general" <
> aur-general@lists.archlinux.org> a
> écrit:
>
> > Then we only have to start using xdelta instead of diff to create
> > the
> > patches and we will be fine
On Mon, 2021-05-24 at 09:11 +0200, Miguel Revilla Rodríguez via aur-
general wrote:
> El dom, 23 may 2021 a las 17:12, Manhong Dai via aur-general (<
> aur-general@lists.archlinux.org>) escribió:
>
> >
> > I would fully agree with you if the patch file doesn't inc
On Mon, 2021-05-24 at 14:11 +0200, alad via aur-general wrote:
> On 24/05/2021 13:43, Eli Schwartz via aur-general wrote:
> > Who is this about? The noisetorch software, or the sge software?
> > And
> > what even is this???
> >
> > ...
>
> The orginal discussion was already concluded with [1]. Th
On Mon, 2021-05-24 at 07:43 -0400, Eli Schwartz via aur-general wrote:
> On 5/22/21 4:35 PM, Manhong Dai via aur-general wrote:
> > I fully agree with that the copyright holder doesn't have any ground
> > if
> he
> > is complaining about that the package m
On Sun, May 23, 2021, 6:02 AM Tinu Weber wrote:
> On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 15:06:09 -0400, Manhong Dai via aur-general wrote:
> > "locally patch it in any way you like"
> >
> > I basically agree with everything you said, but the statement quoted
> > above is
On Sat, May 22, 2021, 7:20 PM Паша wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> вс, 23 мая 2021 г. в 02:15, Manhong Dai :
>
>> "(and not copyrighted, surprisingly) part of original source code"
>>
>> I am truly surprised by the quoted above . How can you think the original
>> source code is not copyrighted? As far as
"(and not copyrighted, surprisingly) part of original source code"
I am truly surprised by the quoted above . How can you think the original
source code is not copyrighted? As far as I know, US copyright law doesn't
have distinction between different parts of software code.
Unless the upstream pu
On Sat, May 22, 2021, 4:15 PM Miguel Revilla Rodríguez via aur-general <
aur-general@lists.archlinux.org> wrote:
> El sáb, 22 may 2021 a las 21:57, Manhong Dai () escribió:
>
> >
> > I repectfully disagree. In this case the package maintainer had a patch
> > file which includes some source code.
>
On Sat, May 22, 2021, 3:52 PM Miguel Revilla Rodríguez via aur-general <
aur-general@lists.archlinux.org> wrote:
> El sáb, 22 may 2021 a las 20:51, Yangjun Wang via aur-general (<
> aur-general@lists.archlinux.org>) escribió:
>
> >
> > Not a lawyer here, but here is my opinion on the matter.
> >
>
On Sat, May 22, 2021, 2:52 PM Yangjun Wang via aur-general <
aur-general@lists.archlinux.org> wrote:
>
> On 5/21/21 7:48 PM, Manhong Dai via aur-general wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 2021-05-21 at 19:34 +0200, Ralf Mardorf via aur-general wrote:
> >> On Fri, 21 May 2021
On Fri, May 21, 2021, 6:34 PM Daniel Berjón Díez
wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 21 May 2021 at 22:26, Manhong Dai wrote:
>
>>
>> Further, as Daniel already pointed out, this case is just about API.
>>
>
> I did no such thing, I merely pointed out that one of their arguments is
> that the copy was not subs
On Fri, May 21, 2021, 4:47 PM Паша wrote:
>
>
> пт, 21 мая 2021 г., 23:40 Manhong Dai via aur-general <
> aur-general@lists.archlinux.org>:
>
>> On Fri, May 21, 2021, 4:36 PM mar77i via aur-general <
>> aur-general@lists.archlinux.org> wrote:
>>
On Fri, May 21, 2021, 4:36 PM mar77i via aur-general <
aur-general@lists.archlinux.org> wrote:
> -‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
> On Friday, May 21, 2021 10:25 PM, Manhong Dai via aur-general <
> aur-general@lists.archlinux.org> wrote:
> > IMHO, as it is very tricky
On Fri, May 21, 2021, 2:30 PM Daniel Berjón Díez via aur-general <
aur-general@lists.archlinux.org> wrote:
> Hi ente,
>
> On Fri, 21 May 2021 at 19:11, ente via aur-general <
> aur-general@lists.archlinux.org> wrote:
>
> > In - broadly speaking - any other situation, you are copying. Copying
> > i
"locally patch it in any way you like"
I basically agree with everything you said, but the statement quoted
above is tricky.
As I said before, it really depends on how you patch it. If it is a diff
patch file, which always uses the original code, then the upstream
programmer does have a ground
On Fri, 2021-05-21 at 19:34 +0200, Ralf Mardorf via aur-general wrote:
> On Fri, 21 May 2021 12:37:05 -0400, Manhong Dai wrote:
> > I still think even 'sensible modifications' is still a modification,
> > especially if the original author has an issue with it.
>
> Yesno ;)! There are GPL vs BS
On Fri, 2021-05-21 at 19:10 +0200, ente via aur-general wrote:
> On Fri, 2021-05-21 at 18:27 +0200, Ralf Mardorf via aur-general
> wrote:
> > Hi Manhong,
> >
> > it's squishy to form an opinion related to violation of a
> > license and toleration of sensible modifications and sometimes even
> > to
On Fri, 2021-05-21 at 09:50 -0700, Brett Cornwall via aur-general
wrote:
> On 2021-05-21 11:54, Manhong Dai via aur-general wrote:
> > I know I will be the minority in this list. However, this statement
> > doesn't sound right to me if the patch file is applied to the
> >
On Fri, 2021-05-21 at 18:27 +0200, Ralf Mardorf via aur-general wrote:
> Hi Manhong,
>
> it's squishy to form an opinion related to violation of a
> license and toleration of sensible modifications and sometimes even
> to
> distinguish between theft and fortuitousness.
>
> If you wrote a song nam
> Date: Thu, 20 May 2021 15:05:21 -0500
> From: "David C. Rankin"
> To: aur-general@lists.archlinux.org
> Subject: Re: [aur-general] Notification of GPL violation
> Message-ID:
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> On 5/18/21 2:06 AM, Brett Cornwall via aur-general wrote:
> > On 2021-0
23 matches
Mail list logo
