Hi,
Marc Haber:
> - the OP was in a position to ask the author to relicense.
>
not to forget
- the *author* would be in a position to relicense.
(Corporate policy, NDAs, embedded 3rd-party libraries …)
--
-- Matthias Urlichs
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
On Sun, 2014-10-12 at 14:07 +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 11:14:23AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 1:52 AM, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > > We're not the FSF here.
> >
> > I don't understand this sentence, could you explain what you mean?
>
> I was hop
On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 11:14:23AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 1:52 AM, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > We're not the FSF here.
>
> I don't understand this sentence, could you explain what you mean?
I was hoping you wouldn't ask that ;-)
Anyway, since you did:
The FSF has a sta
On Sun, 12 Oct 2014 11:14:23 +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
>On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 1:52 AM, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>> "install it locally" is most easily done by "generate a package, install said
>> package". Can we stop judging people by what they're trying to do, please?
>
>I didn't intend any judgem
On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 1:52 AM, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> "install it locally" is most easily done by "generate a package, install said
> package". Can we stop judging people by what they're trying to do, please?
I didn't intend any judgement, could you suggest an alternate wording
that wouldn't
On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 07:19:07AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 9:48 PM, Mathieu Slabbinck wrote:
>
> > I was wondering if anyone could point me to the best practice way of doing
> > this.
>
> Best practice would be to contact the copyright holder and ask them to
> convert the
On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 03:46:27PM +0200, Michael Ole Olsen wrote:
> having a too large non-free repos is not a good thing IMO.
Be that as it may, there's no reason why Debian as a whole should agree with
that.
--
It is easy to love a country that is famous for chocolate and beer
-- Barack Ob
I sent the poor guy a link to my bashrc with how to compile
debian binary and source packages then noone has to feel bad :-)
but true, constructive feedback is much better than flaming just
to flame
I bet most of us have tried running non-free at some time,
and seen several reasons, i.e. adobe fl
Ben Finney writes:
> Brian May writes:
>
>> On 9 October 2014 09:03, Ben Finney wrote:
>>
>> > On that point: It is in poor taste to declare up front that you have
>> > no intention of helping the free software community (which is what
>> > it means to release proprietary software), and then in
On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 03:48:22PM +0200, Mathieu Slabbinck wrote:
> I'm creating a .deb installer for Ubuntu which contains a proprietary
> binary.
> I was wondering if anyone could point me to the best practice way of doing
> this.
>From the purely technical point of view the license doesn't matt
On Thu, 09 Oct 2014 09:03:49 +1100, Ben Finney
wrote:
>On that point: It is in poor taste to declare up front that you have no
>intention of helping the free software community (which is what it means
>to release proprietary software), and then in the same message ask that
>same community for help
On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 9:48 PM, Mathieu Slabbinck wrote:
> I was wondering if anyone could point me to the best practice way of doing
> this.
Best practice would be to contact the copyright holder and ask them to
convert the software to FLOSS. If they refuse to do so, then try to
find, write or c
You should repent your sins
Thinking proprietary is a sin in the free software community
Making a fully free replacement is a much better way, don't taint your
operating system or kernel!
Might as well change to windows then, because running non-free isn't that bad
eh?
The free software moveme
Brian May writes:
> On 9 October 2014 09:03, Ben Finney wrote:
>
> > On that point: It is in poor taste to declare up front that you have
> > no intention of helping the free software community (which is what
> > it means to release proprietary software), and then in the same
> > message ask tha
On 9 October 2014 09:03, Ben Finney wrote:
> On that point: It is in poor taste to declare up front that you have no
> intention of helping the free software community (which is what it means
> to release proprietary software), and then in the same message ask that
> same community for help in do
Mathieu Slabbinck writes:
> Currently I use dh_make to set everything up, but to have everything
> legally compliant, I don't think this is the best choice.
What do you mean by “legally compliant”?
If you mean “compliant with Debian packaging policy”, then no,
proprietary software is incompatib
On Wed, 8 Oct 2014 15:48:22 +0200, Mathieu Slabbinck
wrote:
>Currently I use dh_make to set everything up, but to have everything
>legally compliant, I don't think this is the best choice.
Why not?
Greetings
Marc
--
-- !! No courtesy copies, please !! -
M
17 matches
Mail list logo
