Re: APSL 2.0

To: debian-legal@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: APSL 2.0
From: MJ Ray <markj@cloaked.freeserve.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2003 18:58:39 -0000
Message-id: <[🔎] slrnbj58av.9uv.markj+0111@bouncing.localnet>
References: <[🔎] hhsmod3n2w.fsf@theorie.physik.uni-muenchen.de> <[🔎] hhsmod3n2w.fsf@theorie.physik.uni-muenchen.de> <[🔎] 1060249133.1386.51.camel@work.consulting.net.nz> <[🔎] slrnbj4bpl.2d9.markj+0111@bouncing.localnet> <[🔎] slrnbj4bpl.2d9.markj+0111@bouncing.localnet> <[🔎] 20030807180712.GA30331@bk.cx>

Brian Kimball <bk@bk.cx> wrote:
> We should petition the FSF to go all the way and require a guarantee of
> full write access to the machines providing these services.

I think that you have broken normal logical extension in two emails about
this licence now.  Why do you think that offering a fixed service version
yourself is not a viable option?

Reply to:

Follow-Ups:
- Re: APSL 2.0
  - From: Brian Kimball <bk@bk.cx>

References:
- APSL 2.0
  - From: Jens Schmalzing <jens.schmalzing@physik.uni-muenchen.de>
- Re: APSL 2.0
  - From: Adam Warner <lists@consulting.net.nz>
- Re: APSL 2.0
  - From: MJ Ray <markj@cloaked.freeserve.co.uk>
- Re: APSL 2.0
  - From: Brian Kimball <bk@bk.cx>

Prev by Date: Re: a minimal copyleft
Next by Date: Re: a minimal copyleft
Previous by thread: Re: APSL 2.0
Next by thread: Re: APSL 2.0
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread