ions that Debian doesn't
like.
Please let us know when/if you want to be a member of oCERT. We can then
interact about license decision.
Cheers
--
Andrea Barisani |Founder & Project Coordinator
oCERT | Open Source Computer Emergency Response Team
<[EMAIL
for
handling embargoed issues and background discussions related to free
software. Personally, I don't see the need for yet another
vulnerability sharing club, especially since Ocert seems to insist on
Ocert <-> vendor communication (or maybe it's even Ocert <-> individual,
hard to
Hi,
[removed some of the cc:s]
On Sunday 13 April 2008 02:23, Andrea Barisani wrote:
> We already agreed that CC-BY-NC is not open enough, that's why we will
> consider CC-BY.
>
> I believe that license address your concerns, right?
If its CC-BY 3.0, yes. 2.5 is not good enough, afaik ;)
regar
-Evan
>
We already agreed that CC-BY-NC is not open enough, that's why we will
consider CC-BY.
I believe that license address your concerns, right?
Cheers!
--
Andrea Barisani |Founder & Project Coordinator
oCERT | Open Source Computer Emergency Response Team
&l
On Sat, 2008-04-12 at 12:06 -0700, Rick Moen wrote:
> Quoting Yves-Alexis Perez ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>
> > But CC-BY-NC is not considered
> > DFSG-free so it may be an issue (see
> > http://people.debian.org/~evan/ccsummary.html)
>
> It is considered DFSG-non-free by some number of (not identifi
Quoting Yves-Alexis Perez ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> But CC-BY-NC is not considered
> DFSG-free so it may be an issue (see
> http://people.debian.org/~evan/ccsummary.html)
It is considered DFSG-non-free by some number of (not identified) members
of the public mailing list debian-legal, as summarised
27;m not the one in charge, so I won't be able to answer (I was just
> porting the issue to ocert team). But CC-BY-NC is not considered
> DFSG-free so it may be an issue (see
> http://people.debian.org/~evan/ccsummary.html)
>
> @debian-security: what would you consider an accepta
On sam, 2008-04-12 at 19:16 +0200, Andrea Barisani wrote:
> Ok, CC-BY (or CC-A) would allow this.
>
> Yves, would this be ok with you?
(my name is Yves-Alexis)
I'm not the one in charge, so I won't be able to answer (I was just
porting the issue to ocert team). But CC-BY-N
small side note, I just hope that the non-free licensing is not applying
> > to
> > the submitted advisories :
> >
> > http://www.ocert.org/legal.html
> >
> > "The contents of oCERT website are licensed under a
> > Creative Commons Attributio
team already got a mail by the oCert
guys about joining afaik. So be patient :)
Kind regards
Nico
--
Nico Golde - http://www.ngolde.de - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - GPG: 0x73647CFF
For security reasons, all text in this mail is double-rot13 encrypted.
pgpiBE5Fv7JYP.pgp
Description: PGP signature
gency Response Team)?
> >
> > It could be nice to share advisories and that sort of things.
>
> Yes, a good and reasonable idea.
>
> A small side note, I just hope that the non-free licensing is not applying to
> the submitted advisories :
>
> http://www.ocert.org
things.
Yes, a good and reasonable idea.
A small side note, I just hope that the non-free licensing is not applying to
the submitted advisories :
http://www.ocert.org/legal.html
"The contents of oCERT website are licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No
Hi list,
would it make sense for Debian to participate to http://www.ocert.org
(Opensource Computer Emergency Response Team)?
It could be nice to share advisories and that sort of things.
Cheers,
--
Yves-Alexis
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
13 matches
Mail list logo
