[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: mozilla that works



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Gjermund Skogstad wrote:
| Tuesday April 27 2004, 09:46, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
|
|>Gjermund Skogstad wrote:
|
| [snip]
|
|>| Please take a look at the docs, especially numbers 4, 5 and 6:
|>| http://developer.skolelinux.no/info/cdbygging/sl-packages_appendix/
|>
|>Quite interesting!
|>
|>Please discuss that with debian-legal@lists.debian.org - I am certain
|>you are not the first to read those documents, and not the first with an
|>interest in Java as an official Debian package.
|>
|
| Well I'm not so sure about that, I'm one the sources :)
|
| As far as I understand the jurisdiction in this matter, the
organisation I've
| negotiated this agreement for is "Linux i Skolen" (aka "Skolelinux")
which is
| the legal owner of the Skolelinux-project. Exactly where do you find
that
| these document's content translates to debian's legal domain? I sure
can't
| see any connection.
|
| My standing in this issue is that if debian wants the Java
runtime-binaries
| from SUN Microsystems, which I presume they don't given the fact that
it's
| missing from sage, I trust their ability to negotiate them selfs a
deal to do
| so. (However, please remember that I'm not a lawyer and are not
planning to
| be one soon either.)
|
|
|>'cause "we" does mean Debian, right?
|>
|
| Nope. "We" means Skolelinux, not debian. (Period.)


Thank you for the clarification.


I thought debian-edu@lists.debian.org was for Debian, and
linuxiskolen@skolelinux.no was for Skolelinux. (Period.)


~ - Jonas

- --
* Jonas Smedegaard - idealist og Internet-arkitekt
* Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

~ - Enden er nær: http://www.shibumi.org/eoti.htm
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFAkCr1n7DbMsAkQLgRAii1AKCYr2m26rZfCMXGYVCc2e4g269NZACdEz4x
qtjGvUiW9aYhHiiUook9r6o=
=7CcX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



Reply to: