Re: Gnus Manual License

2006-10-10 Thread David Kastrup
Hubert Chan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Fri, 06 Oct 2006 20:23:35 +0200, David Kastrup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > >> Hubert Chan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> On Fri, 06 Oct 2006 08:35:19 +0200, David Kastrup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >>> Hubert Chan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >

Re: Gnus Manual License

2006-10-10 Thread Hubert Chan
On Fri, 06 Oct 2006 20:23:35 +0200, David Kastrup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > Hubert Chan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> On Fri, 06 Oct 2006 08:35:19 +0200, David Kastrup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >> >>> Hubert Chan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Huh? Are you saying that it's OK to publish som

Re: Gnus Manual License

2006-10-10 Thread Hubert Chan
On Sat, 07 Oct 2006 01:12:10 +0200, David Kastrup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > Daniel Brockman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> David Kastrup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >>> [...] For example, GFDL-hostile entities like Debian will be free to >>> distribute the material GPL-only, meaning that it

Re: Gnus Manual License

2006-10-10 Thread Hubert Chan
On Fri, 06 Oct 2006 19:58:08 +0200, David Kastrup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >> My point, though, is that I believe that the differences between the >> restrictions in the OpenSSL license and the GFDL license are >> sufficient such that one cannot say that "If OpenSSL is allowed, the >> GFDL docume