"Bryan Donlan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It sounds like upstream may have meant to go for a dual-licensing
> arrangement, but incorrectly stated "both" rather than "either" - it'd
> probably be a good idea to contact upstream and ask for clarification.
> Certainly if this was a dual-license arra
On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 3:38 PM, MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Maximilian Gaß <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I'm currently packaging libopenoffice-oodoc-perl and stumbled upon its
>> license:
>>
>> > This software is free software. It is subject to the terms and
>> > conditions of both
Maximilian Gaß <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm currently packaging libopenoffice-oodoc-perl and stumbled upon its
> license:
>
> > This software is free software. It is subject to the terms and
> > conditions of both
> >
> > - the GNU Lesser General Public Licence, version 2.1, of
Hey debian-legal,
I'm currently packaging libopenoffice-oodoc-perl and stumbled upon its
license:
> This software is free software. It is subject to the terms and
> conditions of both
>
> - the GNU Lesser General Public Licence, version 2.1, of the
> Free Software F
4 matches
Mail list logo
