On Thu, 12 Jan 2006, Dave Turner via RT wrote:
> > So: I am right to think that "old" licenses will not be updated?
>
> I asked RMS, and he told me to ask Eben. I asked Eben and he hasn't
> gotten back to me yet. I don't see any reason not to do the update.
> But I don't think I can give offic
Santiago Vila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, 6 Oct 2005, Matej Vela wrote:
>
>> LGPL-2 should also be updated with the new FSF address.
>
> I can't do that if the official version isn't updated first, as the
> license itself does not allow modifications, and this has not happened.
>
> Moreo
On Thu, 6 Oct 2005, Matej Vela wrote:
> Package: base-files
> Version: 3.1.9
> Severity: minor
>
> LGPL-2 should also be updated with the new FSF address.
I can't do that if the official version isn't updated first, as the
license itself does not allow modifications, and this has not happened.
Package: base-files
Version: 3.1.9
Severity: minor
LGPL-2 should also be updated with the new FSF address.
Thanks,
Matej
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
4 matches
Mail list logo
