debian-legal Aug 2003 by thread
[
previous month
]
[
first page
]
[previous page]
Page 1 of 3
[
next page
]
[
last page
]
[
next month
]
[
Date Index
] [
Subject Index
] [
Author Index
] [
Other Debian Lists
] [
Debian Home
]
Re: GNU FDL and Debian
Thomas Bushnell, BSG
Re: Bug#156287: Advice on Drip (ITP #156287)
Thomas Bushnell, BSG
Re: Bug#156287: Advice on Drip (ITP #156287)
Brian T. Sniffen
Re: Bug#156287: Advice on Drip (ITP #156287)
Thomas Bushnell, BSG
Re: Bug#156287: Advice on Drip (ITP #156287)
Brian T. Sniffen
Re: Bug#156287: Advice on Drip (ITP #156287)
Thomas Bushnell, BSG
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Brian Nelson
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
David B Harris
<Possible follow-ups>
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Henning Makholm
Inconsistencies in our approach
John Goerzen
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Brian T. Sniffen
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
John Goerzen
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Steve Langasek
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
John Goerzen
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
John Goerzen
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Nick Phillips
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Steve Langasek
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Nick Phillips
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Brian T. Sniffen
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
John Goerzen
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Nathanael Nerode
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Dylan Thurston
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Nathanael Nerode
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Manoj Srivastava
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
John H. Robinson, IV
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Manoj Srivastava
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Jakob Bohm
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Dylan Thurston
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Joe Wreschnig
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Sergey V. Spiridonov
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Branden Robinson
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Lynn Winebarger
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Henning Makholm
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Branden Robinson
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
John Goerzen
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Andrew Suffield
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
John Goerzen
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Henning Makholm
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
John Goerzen
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Nathanael Nerode
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Andrew Suffield
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Nick Phillips
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Andrew Suffield
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Lynn Winebarger
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Andrew Suffield
Message not available
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Fedor Zuev
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
MJ Ray
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Fedor Zuev
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Keith Dunwoody
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Fedor Zuev
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Keith Dunwoody
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Fedor Zuev
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
MJ Ray
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Joe Moore
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Andrew Suffield
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Anthony DeRobertis
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Anthony DeRobertis
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Manoj Srivastava
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Fedor Zuev
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Manoj Srivastava
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Fedor Zuev
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Manoj Srivastava
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Anthony DeRobertis
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Stephane Bortzmeyer
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Manoj Srivastava
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Richard Braakman
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Manoj Srivastava
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Sergey V. Spiridonov
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Brian T. Sniffen
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Matthew Garrett
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
John Goerzen
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
John H. Robinson, IV
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Richard Braakman
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Sergey V. Spiridonov
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Thomas Bushnell, BSG
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Nick Phillips
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
John H. Robinson, IV
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Branden Robinson
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Nathanael Nerode
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
John Goerzen
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
MJ Ray
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Brian T. Sniffen
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Thomas Bushnell, BSG
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Nathanael Nerode
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Anthony DeRobertis
Re: OT: TV signals [Was: Inconsistencies in our approach]
Joe Wreschnig
Re: OT: TV signals [Was: Inconsistencies in our approach]
Keith Dunwoody
Re: OT: TV signals [Was: Inconsistencies in our approach]
Joe Wreschnig
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Nick Phillips
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Anthony DeRobertis
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Thomas Bushnell, BSG
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Nathanael Nerode
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Joey Hess
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Joe Wreschnig
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Joe Moore
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
MJ Ray
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Lynn Winebarger
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
MJ Ray
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Anthony DeRobertis
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Lynn Winebarger
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
John Goerzen
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
John Goerzen
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Anthony DeRobertis
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Thomas Bushnell, BSG
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
John Goerzen
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
MJ Ray
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Matthew Garrett
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
John Goerzen
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Matthew Garrett
Message not available
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Matthew Garrett
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Thomas Bushnell, BSG
OT: Documentation as a Program [Re: Inconsistencies in our approach]
Don Armstrong
Re: OT: Documentation as a Program [Re: Inconsistencies in our approach]
Thomas Bushnell, BSG
Re: OT: Documentation as a Program [Re: Inconsistencies in our approach]
Don Armstrong
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Nathanael Nerode
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Joe Moore
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Wouter Verhelst
Re: Inconsistencies in our approach
Matthew Garrett
please check mplayer 0.90-3
A Mennucc1
License evaluation sought
Tore Anderson
Re: License evaluation sought
Brian T. Sniffen
Re: License evaluation sought
Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker
Re: License evaluation sought
Tore Anderson
Re: License evaluation sought
Joe Wreschnig
Re: License evaluation sought
Tore Anderson
Re: License evaluation sought
Joe Wreschnig
Re: License evaluation sought
Tore Anderson
Re: License evaluation sought
Richard Braakman
Re: License evaluation sought
Tore Anderson
Re: License evaluation sought
Joe Wreschnig
Re: License evaluation sought
Tore Anderson
Re: License evaluation sought
Branden Robinson
Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in our approach)
Sergey V. Spiridonov
Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in our approach)
MJ Ray
Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in our approach)
Sergey V. Spiridonov
Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in our approach)
Matthew Garrett
Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in our approach)
Sergey V. Spiridonov
Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in our approach)
Matthew Garrett
Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in our approach)
Adam Warner
Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in our approach)
Stephane Bortzmeyer
Re: Should our documentation be free?
Nathanael Nerode
Re: Should our documentation be free?
Nathanael Nerode
Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in our approach)
MJ Ray
Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in our approach)
Sergey V. Spiridonov
Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in our approach)
MJ Ray
Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in our approach)
Sergey V. Spiridonov
Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in our approach)
Anthony DeRobertis
Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in our approach)
Anthony DeRobertis
Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in our approach)
Don Armstrong
Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in our approach)
Sergey V. Spiridonov
Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in our approach)
Don Armstrong
Re: Should our documentation be free?
Manoj Srivastava
Re: Should our documentation be free?
Don Armstrong
Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in our approach)
Andreas Metzler
Re: Should our documentation be free?
Manoj Srivastava
Re: Should our documentation be free?
Andreas Metzler
Re: Should our documentation be free?
MJ Ray
<Possible follow-ups>
Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in our approach)
Claus Färber
Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in our approach)
Joe Wreschnig
Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in
Joe Moore
Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in
Brian T. Sniffen
Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in
Joe Moore
Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in
Joe Wreschnig
Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in
Joe Moore
Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in
Joe Wreschnig
Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in
Joe Moore
Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in
Brian T. Sniffen
Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in
Joe Moore
Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in
Joe Wreschnig
Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in
Joe Moore
Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in
Scott James Remnant
Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in
Andrew Suffield
Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in our approach)
Nathanael Nerode
Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in our approach)
Branden Robinson
Re: Should our documentation be free?
Nathanael Nerode
Re: Should our documentation be free?
MJ Ray
perl modules' default licence
Nicholas Clark
Re: perl modules' default licence
Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker
Re: perl modules' default licence
Jakob Bohm
Re: perl modules' default licence
Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS
Re: perl modules' default licence
Jakob Bohm
Re: perl modules' default licence
Nicholas Clark
Re: perl modules' default licence
Jakob Bohm
msession copyright
Joerg Wendland
Re: msession copyright
Jakob Bohm
Re: msession copyright
Joerg Wendland
Re: msession copyright
Matthew Palmer
a minimal copyleft
Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS
Re: a minimal copyleft
Keith Stephen Dunwoody
Re: a minimal copyleft
Jacobo Tarrio
Re: a minimal copyleft
Branden Robinson
Re: a minimal copyleft
Andrew Suffield
Re: a minimal copyleft
Richard Braakman
Re: a minimal copyleft
Glenn Maynard
Re: a minimal copyleft
Andrew Suffield
Re: a minimal copyleft
Joe Wreschnig
Re: a minimal copyleft
Anthony DeRobertis
Re: a minimal copyleft
Glenn Maynard
Re: a minimal copyleft
Anthony DeRobertis
Re: a minimal copyleft
Joe Wreschnig
Re: a minimal copyleft
Anthony DeRobertis
Re: a minimal copyleft
Joe Wreschnig
Re: a minimal copyleft
Andrew Suffield
Re: a minimal copyleft
Steve Langasek
Re: a minimal copyleft
Andrew Suffield
Re: a minimal copyleft
Steve Langasek
Re: a minimal copyleft
Anthony DeRobertis
Re: a minimal copyleft
Andrew Suffield
EBCDIC (WAS: Re: a minimal copyleft)
Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS
Re: a minimal copyleft
Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS
Re: a minimal copyleft
Joe Wreschnig
Re: a minimal copyleft
Anthony DeRobertis
Re: a minimal copyleft
Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS
Re: a minimal copyleft
Andrew Suffield
Re: a minimal copyleft
Anthony DeRobertis
Re: a minimal copyleft
Stephane Bortzmeyer
Re: a minimal copyleft
Stephane Bortzmeyer
Take a Fantasy Cruise with Me!
Katrina
Lossless JPEG software, a patch without a license
Steve King
Re: Lossless JPEG software, a patch without a license
Matthew Palmer
Re: mplayer licenses
gabucino
Re: mplayer licenses
Josselin Mouette
Re: mplayer licenses
gabucino
Re: mplayer licenses
Josselin Mouette
Re: mplayer licenses
gabucino
Re: mplayer licenses
Adam Warner
semi-OT: does SPI have cause of action against SCO?
Steve Langasek
Re: semi-OT: does SPI have cause of action against SCO?
Nathanael Nerode
<Possible follow-ups>
Re: semi-OT: does SPI have cause of action against SCO?
andrew
APSL 2.0
Jens Schmalzing
Re: APSL 2.0
Adam Warner
Re: APSL 2.0
Lynn Winebarger
Re: APSL 2.0
Adam Warner
Re: APSL 2.0
Matthew Palmer
Re: APSL 2.0
Brian T. Sniffen
Re: APSL 2.0
Adam Warner
Re: APSL 2.0
Branden Robinson
Re: {debian-legal} Re: APSL 2.0
M. Drew Streib
Re: {debian-legal} Re: APSL 2.0
Mark Rafn
Re: {debian-legal} Re: APSL 2.0
Brian T. Sniffen
Re: APSL 2.0
MJ Ray
Re: APSL 2.0
Adam Warner
Re: APSL 2.0
Matthew Palmer
Re: APSL 2.0
MJ Ray
Re: APSL 2.0
Adam Warner
Re: APSL 2.0
MJ Ray
Re: APSL 2.0
Stephen Ryan
Re: APSL 2.0
MJ Ray
Re: APSL 2.0
Brian T. Sniffen
Re: APSL 2.0
Stephen Ryan
Re: APSL 2.0: does "complete source code" exclude data?
Mark Rafn
Re: APSL 2.0
Jeremy Hankins
Re: APSL 2.0
Bernhard R. Link
Re: APSL 2.0
Anthony DeRobertis
Re: APSL 2.0
Arnoud Galactus Engelfriet
Re: APSL 2.0
Mark Rafn
Re: APSL 2.0
Jeremy Hankins
Re: APSL 2.0
Mark Rafn
Re: APSL 2.0
Jeremy Hankins
Re: APSL 2.0
Brian T. Sniffen
Re: APSL 2.0
Jeremy Hankins
Re: APSL 2.0
Brian T. Sniffen
Re: APSL 2.0
Jeremy Hankins
Re: APSL 2.0
Branden Robinson
Re: APSL 2.0
Andrew Suffield
Re: APSL 2.0
Mark Rafn
Re: APSL 2.0
Jeremy Hankins
Re: APSL 2.0
Mark Rafn
Re: APSL 2.0
Jeremy Hankins
Re: APSL 2.0
Mark Rafn
Re: APSL 2.0
Jeremy Hankins
Re: APSL 2.0
Anthony DeRobertis
Re: APSL 2.0
Jeremy Hankins
Re: APSL 2.0
Anthony DeRobertis
Re: APSL 2.0
Nathanael Nerode
Re: APSL 2.0
Jeremy Hankins
Re: APSL 2.0
Brian Kimball
Re: APSL 2.0
MJ Ray
Re: APSL 2.0
Brian Kimball
Re: APSL 2.0
MJ Ray
Re: APSL 2.0
Anthony DeRobertis
Re: APSL 2.0
Henning Makholm
mozilla export restrictions
Wolfgang Fischer
Re: mozilla export restrictions
Florian Weimer
Re: mozilla export restrictions
Barak Pearlmutter
<Possible follow-ups>
Re: mozilla export restrictions
Wolfgang Fischer
Re: mozilla export restrictions
Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker
A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Wouter Verhelst
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
MJ Ray
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Wouter Verhelst
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Andrew Suffield
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Branden Robinson
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
MJ Ray
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Branden Robinson
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
MJ Ray
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Branden Robinson
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Claus Färber
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
MJ Ray
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Andrew Suffield
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Wouter Verhelst
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Josselin Mouette
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Wouter Verhelst
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
MJ Ray
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Lynn Winebarger
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Branden Robinson
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
MJ Ray
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Wouter Verhelst
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
MJ Ray
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Wouter Verhelst
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
MJ Ray
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Wouter Verhelst
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
MJ Ray
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Branden Robinson
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Wouter Verhelst
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Branden Robinson
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Wouter Verhelst
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Branden Robinson
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Andrew Suffield
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Anthony DeRobertis
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
MJ Ray
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Fedor Zuev
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
MJ Ray
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
MJ Ray
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Fedor Zuev
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
MJ Ray
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Fedor Zuev
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
MJ Ray
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Fedor Zuev
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Branden Robinson
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Nick Phillips
Re: A possible approach in 'solving' the FDL problem
Brian T. Sniffen
Re: A possible approach in 'solving' the FDL problem
Wouter Verhelst
Re: A possible approach in 'solving' the FDL problem
Brian T. Sniffen
Re: A possible approach in 'solving' the FDL problem
Sergey V. Spiridonov
Re: A possible approach in 'solving' the FDL problem
Anthony DeRobertis
Re: A possible approach in 'solving' the FDL problem
Sergey V. Spiridonov
Re: A possible approach in 'solving' the FDL problem
Andrew Suffield
Re: A possible approach in 'solving' the FDL problem
Branden Robinson
Re: A possible approach in 'solving' the FDL problem
Anthony DeRobertis
Re: A possible approach in 'solving' the FDL problem
Richard Braakman
Re: A possible approach in 'solving' the FDL problem
Sergey V. Spiridonov
Re: A possible approach in 'solving' the FDL problem
Andrew Suffield
Re: A possible approach in 'solving' the FDL problem
Anthony DeRobertis
Re: A possible approach in 'solving' the FDL problem
Branden Robinson
Re: A possible approach in 'solving' the FDL problem
Wouter Verhelst
Re: A possible approach in 'solving' the FDL problem
Branden Robinson
Re: A possible approach in 'solving' the FDL problem
Wouter Verhelst
Re: A possible approach in 'solving' the FDL problem
Wouter Verhelst
Re: A possible approach in 'solving' the FDL problem
Brian T. Sniffen
Re: A possible approach in 'solving' the FDL problem
MJ Ray
Re: A possible approach in 'solving' the FDL problem
Anthony DeRobertis
Re: A possible approach in 'solving' the FDL problem
Branden Robinson
Re: A possible approach in 'solving' the FDL problem
Richard Braakman
Re: A possible approach in 'solving' the FDL problem
Sergey V. Spiridonov
Re: A possible approach in 'solving' the FDL problem
MJ Ray
Re: A possible approach in 'solving' the FDL problem
Sergey V. Spiridonov
Re: A possible approach in 'solving' the FDL problem
Andrew Suffield
Re: A possible approach in 'solving' the FDL problem
Branden Robinson
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Andrew Suffield
PROCLAMATION REGARDING SOFTWARE AND DOCUMENTATION
Branden Robinson
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Branden Robinson
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Andrew Suffield
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Peter S Galbraith
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Branden Robinson
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Wouter Verhelst
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Branden Robinson
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Wouter Verhelst
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Andrew Suffield
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
MJ Ray
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Branden Robinson
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Steve Langasek
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Branden Robinson
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Sergey V. Spiridonov
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
MJ Ray
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Sergey V. Spiridonov
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Joe Wreschnig
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Sergey V. Spiridonov
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Fedor Zuev
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Anthony DeRobertis
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Fedor Zuev
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
MJ Ray
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Fedor Zuev
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
MJ Ray
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Anthony DeRobertis
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Jimmy Kaplowitz
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Anthony DeRobertis
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Wouter Verhelst
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Jacobo Tarrio
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
MJ Ray
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Wouter Verhelst
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Wouter Verhelst
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
MJ Ray
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Wouter Verhelst
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
MJ Ray
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Wouter Verhelst
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
MJ Ray
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Wouter Verhelst
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Branden Robinson
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Wouter Verhelst
debian-legal needs a FAQ (was: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem)
Anthony DeRobertis
Re: debian-legal needs a FAQ (was: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem)
MJ Ray
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Branden Robinson
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Anthony DeRobertis
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Wouter Verhelst
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Bernhard R. Link
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Anthony DeRobertis
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Fedor Zuev
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Bernhard R. Link
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Fedor Zuev
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Anthony DeRobertis
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Nathanael Nerode
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Wouter Verhelst
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Matthew Garrett
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Henning Makholm
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Sergey V. Spiridonov
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Anthony DeRobertis
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Andrew Suffield
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Branden Robinson
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Sergey V. Spiridonov
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Anthony DeRobertis
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Sergey V. Spiridonov
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Brian T. Sniffen
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Andrew Suffield
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
MJ Ray
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Sergey V. Spiridonov
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Branden Robinson
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Branden Robinson
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Branden Robinson
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Nathanael Nerode
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Sergey V. Spiridonov
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Josselin Mouette
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Branden Robinson
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Sergey V. Spiridonov
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Josselin Mouette
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Sergey V. Spiridonov
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Joe Wreschnig
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Sergey V. Spiridonov
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
MJ Ray
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Anthony DeRobertis
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Branden Robinson
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Anthony DeRobertis
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Peter S Galbraith
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Anthony DeRobertis
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Sergey V. Spiridonov
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Jeremy Hankins
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Sergey V. Spiridonov
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Peter S Galbraith
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Sergey V. Spiridonov
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Peter S Galbraith
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Andrew Suffield
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Jeremy Hankins
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Andrew Suffield
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Sergey V. Spiridonov
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Anthony DeRobertis
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Sergey V. Spiridonov
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Stephen Ryan
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
MJ Ray
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Sergey V. Spiridonov
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Peter S Galbraith
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Sergey V. Spiridonov
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Peter S Galbraith
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Sergey V. Spiridonov
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Peter S Galbraith
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Sergey Spiridonov
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Steve Langasek
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Sergey Spiridonov
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
MJ Ray
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Sergey Spiridonov
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
MJ Ray
Then let's hear your proposal
Jeremy Hankins
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Anthony DeRobertis
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Andrew Suffield
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Peter S Galbraith
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Manoj Srivastava
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Anthony DeRobertis
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Branden Robinson
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Sergey V. Spiridonov
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Wouter Verhelst
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Sergey Spiridonov
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Branden Robinson
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Jimmy Kaplowitz
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Jeremy Hankins
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Brian T. Sniffen
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Andrew Suffield
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Branden Robinson
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Jimmy Kaplowitz
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Brian T. Sniffen
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Wouter Verhelst
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Sergey V. Spiridonov
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Sergey V. Spiridonov
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Branden Robinson
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Anthony DeRobertis
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Anthony DeRobertis
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Sergey V. Spiridonov
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Anthony DeRobertis
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Sergey V. Spiridonov
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Branden Robinson
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Anthony DeRobertis
Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem
Branden Robinson
The last update was on 06:02 GMT Tue May 28. There are 1420 messages. Page 1 of 3.
[
previous month
]
[
first page
]
[previous page]
Page 1 of 3
[
next page
]
[
last page
]
[
next month
]
[
Date Index
] [
Subject Index
] [
Author Index
] [
Other Debian Lists
] [
Debian Home
]
Mail converted by
MHonArc