[previous month] |
[first page] |
[previous page] |
Page 1 of 3 |
[next page] |
[last page] |
[next month] |

[Thread Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Other Debian Lists] [Debian Home]

Aug 01

**Re: GNU FDL and Debian***Thomas Bushnell, BSG***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***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Henning Makholm***Inconsistencies in our approach***John Goerzen***Re: Bug#156287: Advice on Drip (ITP #156287)***Brian T. Sniffen***please check mplayer 0.90-3***A Mennucc1***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Brian T. Sniffen***License evaluation sought***Tore Anderson***Re: License evaluation sought***Brian T. Sniffen***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Manoj Srivastava***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***Richard Braakman*

Aug 02

**Re: License evaluation sought***Joe Wreschnig***Re: License evaluation sought***Tore Anderson***Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in our approach)***Sergey V. Spiridonov***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Branden Robinson***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***John H. Robinson, IV***perl modules' default licence***Nicholas Clark***msession copyright***Joerg Wendland***Re: msession copyright***Jakob Bohm***Re: perl modules' default licence***Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Manoj Srivastava***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Joe Wreschnig*

Aug 03

**Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Sergey V. Spiridonov***Re: msession copyright***Matthew Palmer***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Nick Phillips***Re: perl modules' default licence***Jakob Bohm***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***John H. Robinson, IV***Re: msession copyright***Joerg Wendland***Re: perl modules' default licence***Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS***Re: License evaluation sought***Tore Anderson***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)***Nathanael Nerode***Re: perl modules' default licence***Jakob Bohm***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Nathanael Nerode***Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in our approach)***Joe Wreschnig***Re: License evaluation sought***Joe Wreschnig***Re: License evaluation sought***Tore Anderson***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Jakob Bohm***Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in our approach)***MJ Ray***a minimal copyleft***Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS*

Aug 04

**Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Dylan Thurston***Re: a minimal copyleft***Keith Stephen Dunwoody***Re: a minimal copyleft***Jacobo Tarrio***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***Take a Fantasy Cruise with Me!***Katrina***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Branden Robinson***Lossless JPEG software, a patch without a license***Steve King***Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in our approach)***Branden Robinson***Re: License evaluation sought***Branden Robinson***Re: a minimal copyleft***Branden Robinson***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Lynn Winebarger***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Henning Makholm***Re: a minimal copyleft***Andrew Suffield***Re: a minimal copyleft***Richard Braakman***Re: a minimal copyleft***Glenn Maynard***Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in***Joe Moore***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Nathanael Nerode*

Aug 05

**Re: Lossless JPEG software, a patch without a license***Matthew Palmer***Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in***Joe Wreschnig***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Branden Robinson***Re: a minimal copyleft***Andrew Suffield***Re: a minimal copyleft***Joe Wreschnig***Re: a minimal copyleft***Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS***Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in***Joe Moore***Re: a minimal copyleft***Joe Wreschnig***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Joey Hess***Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in***Joe Wreschnig***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Joe Wreschnig***Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in***Joe Moore***Re: a minimal copyleft***Anthony DeRobertis***Re: a minimal copyleft***Anthony DeRobertis***Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in***Brian T. Sniffen***Re: a minimal copyleft***Glenn Maynard***Re: a minimal copyleft***Andrew Suffield***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***MJ Ray***Re: a minimal copyleft***Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS***Re: a minimal copyleft***Steve Langasek***Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in our approach)***Sergey V. Spiridonov***Re: a minimal copyleft***Joe Wreschnig***Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in***Joe Wreschnig***Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in***Scott James Remnant***Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in our approach)***Matthew Garrett*

Aug 06

**Re: a minimal copyleft***Andrew Suffield***Re: a minimal copyleft***Andrew Suffield***Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in***Andrew Suffield***Re: a minimal copyleft***Steve Langasek***Re: mplayer licenses***gabucino***Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in***Joe Moore***Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in***Joe Moore***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Joe Moore***Re: perl modules' default licence***Nicholas Clark*

Aug 07

**semi-OT: does SPI have cause of action against SCO?***Steve Langasek***Re: a minimal copyleft***Stephane Bortzmeyer***Re: a minimal copyleft***Stephane Bortzmeyer***APSL 2.0***Jens Schmalzing***Re: mplayer licenses***Josselin Mouette***Re: mplayer licenses***gabucino***Re: APSL 2.0***Adam Warner***Re: mplayer licenses***Josselin Mouette***Re: mplayer licenses***gabucino***Re: APSL 2.0***Lynn Winebarger***Re: mplayer licenses***Adam Warner***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Lynn Winebarger***Re: APSL 2.0***MJ Ray***mozilla export restrictions***Wolfgang Fischer***Re: APSL 2.0***Adam Warner***Re: APSL 2.0***Adam Warner***Re: APSL 2.0***Stephen Ryan***Re: APSL 2.0***Matthew Palmer***Re: APSL 2.0***Matthew Palmer***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***MJ Ray***Re: APSL 2.0***MJ Ray***Re: APSL 2.0***MJ Ray***Re: mozilla export restrictions***Florian Weimer***Re: mozilla export restrictions***Barak Pearlmutter***Re: APSL 2.0***Jeremy Hankins***Re: APSL 2.0***Brian T. Sniffen***Re: APSL 2.0***Bernhard R. Link***Re: mozilla export restrictions***Wolfgang Fischer***Re: APSL 2.0***Brian T. Sniffen***Re: APSL 2.0***Adam Warner***Re: mozilla export restrictions***Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker***Re: APSL 2.0***MJ Ray***Re: APSL 2.0***Adam Warner***Re: APSL 2.0***Stephen Ryan***Re: {debian-legal} Re: APSL 2.0***M. Drew Streib***Re: APSL 2.0***Mark Rafn***Re: APSL 2.0: does "complete source code" exclude data?***Mark Rafn***Re: APSL 2.0***Jeremy Hankins***Re: {debian-legal} Re: APSL 2.0***Mark Rafn***A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Wouter Verhelst***Re: {debian-legal} Re: APSL 2.0***Brian T. Sniffen***Re: APSL 2.0***Brian Kimball***Re: a minimal copyleft***Anthony DeRobertis***Re: a minimal copyleft***Anthony DeRobertis***Re: APSL 2.0***MJ Ray***Re: a minimal copyleft***Anthony DeRobertis***Re: a minimal copyleft***Anthony DeRobertis***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***MJ Ray***Re: APSL 2.0***Mark Rafn***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Andrew Suffield***Re: APSL 2.0***Jeremy Hankins***Re: APSL 2.0***Brian Kimball***Re: APSL 2.0***Branden Robinson***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Wouter Verhelst***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Nathanael Nerode***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Wouter Verhelst***Re: semi-OT: does SPI have cause of action against SCO?***Nathanael Nerode***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Wouter Verhelst***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***John Goerzen***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***John Goerzen***Re: APSL 2.0***Brian T. Sniffen***Re: APSL 2.0***Mark Rafn***Re: a minimal copyleft***Andrew Suffield***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***John Goerzen***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***John Goerzen***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Josselin Mouette***Re: APSL 2.0***MJ Ray***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Steve Langasek***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***Andrew Suffield***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Wouter Verhelst***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***MJ Ray***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***MJ Ray***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Andrew Suffield*

Aug 08

**Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Matthew Garrett***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Matthew Garrett***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***MJ Ray***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Brian T. Sniffen***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Sergey V. Spiridonov***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Henning Makholm***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Brian T. Sniffen***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***John Goerzen***Re: APSL 2.0***Anthony DeRobertis***Re: APSL 2.0***Anthony DeRobertis***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Anthony DeRobertis***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Anthony DeRobertis***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***John Goerzen***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***John Goerzen***Re: APSL 2.0***Henning Makholm***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Henning Makholm***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***John Goerzen***Re: APSL 2.0***Jeremy Hankins***Re: A possible approach in 'solving' the FDL problem***Brian T. Sniffen***Re: APSL 2.0***Jeremy Hankins***Is the Apache Software License DFSG-compliant?***Pierre THIERRY***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Matthew Garrett***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Lynn Winebarger***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Lynn Winebarger***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***John Goerzen***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***John Goerzen***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***John Goerzen***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Lynn Winebarger***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***John Goerzen***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***John Goerzen***Re: Is the Apache Software License DFSG-compliant?***Scott James Remnant***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Matthew Garrett***Re: Is the Apache Software License DFSG-compliant?***Adam Warner***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Steve Langasek***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Wouter Verhelst***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Wouter Verhelst***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Nathanael Nerode***Re: A possible approach in 'solving' the FDL problem***Wouter Verhelst***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Nathanael Nerode***Re: APSL 2.0***Mark Rafn***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Nathanael Nerode***Re: APSL 2.0***Nathanael Nerode***EBCDIC (WAS: Re: a minimal copyleft)***Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS***Re: APSL 2.0***Arnoud Galactus Engelfriet***gif-creating applications?***Andreas Barth***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Matthew Garrett***Re: APSL 2.0***Jeremy Hankins***Re: APSL 2.0***Jeremy Hankins***Re: semi-OT: does SPI have cause of action against SCO?***andrew***Re: A possible approach in 'solving' the FDL problem***Brian T. Sniffen***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Brian T. Sniffen***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Andrew Suffield***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Andrew Suffield***Re: APSL 2.0***Mark Rafn***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***John H. Robinson, IV***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Joe Moore***Re: APSL 2.0***Jeremy Hankins***Re: APSL 2.0***Brian T. Sniffen***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Claus Färber*

Aug 09

**Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Dylan Thurston***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Fedor Zuev***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Anthony DeRobertis***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Wouter Verhelst***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Matthew Garrett***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Kai Henningsen***Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in our approach)***Sergey V. Spiridonov***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Brian T. Sniffen*

Aug 10

**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: Inconsistencies in our approach***Anthony DeRobertis***Re: APSL 2.0***Anthony DeRobertis***Re: APSL 2.0***Anthony DeRobertis***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Anthony DeRobertis***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Nick Phillips***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Nick Phillips***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Andrew Suffield***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Sergey V. Spiridonov***Re: A possible approach in 'solving' the FDL problem***Sergey V. Spiridonov*

Aug 11

**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***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***Andrew Suffield***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***MJ Ray***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***MJ Ray***Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in our approach)***Stephane Bortzmeyer***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Stephane Bortzmeyer***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Neil McGovern***Re: DFSG intent question***Bruce Perens***Re: APSL 2.0***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***Branden Robinson***Re: A possible approach in 'solving' the FDL problem***Branden Robinson***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***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: APSL 2.0***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***Branden Robinson***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Branden Robinson*

Aug 12

**Re: APSL 2.0***Jeremy Hankins***Re: APSL 2.0***Jeremy Hankins***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***Wouter Verhelst***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Nathanael Nerode***Re: Should our documentation be free?***Nathanael Nerode***Re: Should our documentation be free?***Nathanael Nerode***Re: Should our documentation be free?***Nathanael Nerode***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Nathanael Nerode***Re: DFSG intent question***Nathanael Nerode***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Nathanael Nerode***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: DFSG intent question***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***Wouter Verhelst***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***MJ Ray***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***MJ Ray***Re: A possible approach in 'solving' the FDL problem***MJ Ray***Re: Should our documentation be free?***MJ Ray***Re: libdvdcss***Sam Hocevar***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Wouter Verhelst***Re: a minimal copyleft***Joe Wreschnig***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***MJ Ray***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Josselin Mouette***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***MJ Ray***Re: libdvdcss***Joe Drew***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***Branden Robinson***Re: A possible approach in 'solving' the FDL problem***Brian T. Sniffen***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Steve Langasek***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Manoj Srivastava***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Manoj Srivastava***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Sergey V. Spiridonov***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Fedor Zuev***A way of looking at Software, Documentation, and Data***Joe Moore***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Josselin Mouette***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***MJ Ray***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***Branden Robinson***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***Joe Wreschnig***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***Sergey V. Spiridonov***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Sergey V. Spiridonov***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***MJ Ray***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Manoj Srivastava***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***Branden Robinson***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Josselin Mouette***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Anthony DeRobertis***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Anthony DeRobertis***Re: A way of looking at Software, Documentation, and Data***Anthony DeRobertis***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Anthony DeRobertis***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Anthony DeRobertis*

Aug 13

**Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Peter S Galbraith***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Peter S Galbraith***Bug#205152: mldonkey-server: contains obviously illegal non-free code***Robert McQueen***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Stephane Bortzmeyer***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***Sergey V. Spiridonov***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Joe Wreschnig***Re: OT: TV signals [Was: Inconsistencies in our approach]***Joe Wreschnig***Re: OT: TV signals [Was: Inconsistencies in our approach]***Keith Dunwoody***Re: A way of looking at Software, Documentation, and Data***Andrew Suffield***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Fedor Zuev***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Keith Dunwoody***Re: OT: TV signals [Was: Inconsistencies in our approach]***Joe Wreschnig***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Bernhard R. Link***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***Sergey Spiridonov***RE: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Petrisor Marian***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Sergey Spiridonov***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Bernhard R. Link***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Keith Dunwoody***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Nick Phillips***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Nick Phillips***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Nick Phillips***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Josselin Mouette***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Nick Phillips***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Fedor Zuev***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Nick Phillips***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Jeremy Hankins***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Fedor Zuev***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Jimmy Kaplowitz***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Steve Langasek***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***Joe Moore***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Steve Langasek***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Keith Dunwoody***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Peter S Galbraith***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***MJ Ray***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Kyle McMartin***RE: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Fedor Zuev***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Fedor Zuev***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Fedor Zuev***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***Jeremy Hankins***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Andrew Suffield***Re: A possible approach in 'solving' the FDL problem***Andrew Suffield***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Stephen Ryan***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***MJ Ray***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***MJ Ray*

Aug 14

**Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Sergey V. Spiridonov***a lurker's thoughts on "software"***Carl Witty***Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in our approach)***MJ Ray***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: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in our approach)***Sergey V. Spiridonov***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Sergey V. Spiridonov***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Sergey V. Spiridonov***unsubscribe***Andrew Smith***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Jacobo Tarrio***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Wouter Verhelst***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Manoj Srivastava***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Manoj Srivastava***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Wouter Verhelst***Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in our approach)***MJ Ray***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Peter S Galbraith***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***Anthony DeRobertis***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***Anthony DeRobertis***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 (joke)***Anthony DeRobertis***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***Anthony DeRobertis***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***Anthony DeRobertis***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***Sergey V. Spiridonov***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Peter S Galbraith***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***Fedor Zuev***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Steve Langasek***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Brian T. Sniffen***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Anthony DeRobertis***Re: Bug#202723: perl-doc: Non-free manpage included***Mark Jason Dominus***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Jimmy Kaplowitz***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***Sergey V. Spiridonov***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***Andrew Suffield***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem (joke)***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***Branden Robinson***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Branden Robinson***Re: Inconsistencies in our approach***Anthony DeRobertis***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***Branden Robinson***Re: Should our documentation be free? (Was Re: Inconsistencies in our approach)***Sergey V. Spiridonov***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Sergey V. Spiridonov***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Sergey V. Spiridonov*

Aug 15

**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***John Galt***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Sergey V. Spiridonov***Re: Bug#202723: perl-doc: Non-free manpage included***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***Sergey V. Spiridonov***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Sergey Spiridonov***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Sergey Spiridonov***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Anthony DeRobertis***Re: Bug#202723: perl-doc: Non-free manpage included***Abigail***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***Wouter Verhelst***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***Jacobo Tarrio***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***MJ Ray***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Bernhard R. Link***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Wouter Verhelst***Re: A possible approach in "solving" the FDL problem***Wouter Verhelst***Re: Bug#202723: perl-doc: Non-free manpage included***Peter S Galbraith***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***MJ Ray***Then let's hear your proposal***Jeremy Hankins*

[previous month] |
[first page] |
[previous page] |
Page 1 of 3 |
[next page] |
[last page] |
[next month] |

[Thread Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Other Debian Lists] [Debian Home]

Mail converted by MHonArc