Re: WWN license issue

2008-01-19 Thread Eric Pouech
Brian Vincent a écrit : > On Jan 18, 2008 9:26 AM, Alexander Nicolaysen Sørnes > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > > > Now that you mention it, since we are trying to move the AppDB to > the Affero > > GPL v3, it would be nice to have the WWN covered by the similar GLP > v3

Re: WWN license issue

2008-01-19 Thread Alexander Nicolaysen Sørnes
On Saturday 19 January 2008 17:32:58 Zachary Goldberg wrote: > On Jan 19, 2008 7:06 AM, Alexander Nicolaysen Sørnes > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Saturday 19 January 2008 03:11:20 Brian Vincent wrote: > > > On Jan 18, 2008 9:26 AM, Alexander Nicolaysen Sørnes < > > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: WWN license issue

2008-01-19 Thread Zachary Goldberg
On Jan 19, 2008 7:06 AM, Alexander Nicolaysen Sørnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Saturday 19 January 2008 03:11:20 Brian Vincent wrote: > > On Jan 18, 2008 9:26 AM, Alexander Nicolaysen Sørnes < > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Now that you mention it, since we are trying to move the A

Re: WWN license issue

2008-01-19 Thread Alexander Nicolaysen Sørnes
On Saturday 19 January 2008 03:11:20 Brian Vincent wrote: > On Jan 18, 2008 9:26 AM, Alexander Nicolaysen Sørnes < > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Now that you mention it, since we are trying to move the AppDB to the > > Affero > > > GPL v3, it would be nice to have the WWN covered by the similar

Re: WWN license issue

2008-01-18 Thread Brian Vincent
On Jan 18, 2008 9:26 AM, Alexander Nicolaysen Sørnes < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Now that you mention it, since we are trying to move the AppDB to the Affero > GPL v3, it would be nice to have the WWN covered by the similar GLP v3 :) Everything I wrote was GPL v2 and I'm quite happy with that.

Re: WWN license issue

2008-01-18 Thread Alexander Nicolaysen Sørnes
On Tuesday 15 January 2008 21:33:41 Jeremy Newman wrote: > I'll patch it so it points to the GPL v2 licence, unless someone feels > there is a reason it needs to be v3. > Now that you mention it, since we are trying to move the AppDB to the Affero GPL v3, it would be nice to have the WWN covered

Re: WWN license issue

2008-01-16 Thread Ian Macfarlane
For what it's worth, I would prefer, in general, if it were at least GPLv2 or later, but considering that this is just a newsletter and not source code, I don't care that much :) To be honest, I think this it makes more sense under a Creative Commons license (probably the simple Creative Commons A

Re: WWN license issue

2008-01-15 Thread Jeremy Newman
I'll patch it so it points to the GPL v2 licence, unless someone feels there is a reason it needs to be v3. Zachary Goldberg wrote: > On Jan 15, 2008 9:58 AM, Ian Macfarlane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> At the bottom of each WWN issue (for example, the latest >> http://www.winehq.org/?issue=339)

Re: WWN license issue

2008-01-15 Thread Zachary Goldberg
On Jan 15, 2008 9:58 AM, Ian Macfarlane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At the bottom of each WWN issue (for example, the latest > http://www.winehq.org/?issue=339) is the text: > > "All Kernel Cousin issues and summaries are copyright their original > authors, and distributed under the terms of the G

WWN license issue

2008-01-15 Thread Ian Macfarlane
At the bottom of each WWN issue (for example, the latest http://www.winehq.org/?issue=339) is the text: "All Kernel Cousin issues and summaries are copyright their original authors, and distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public License, version 2.0. " However, it links to http://www.g