Re: APSL 2.0
MJ Ray wrote:
> 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.
That was my first post on this topic. You've got me confused with
someone else. Or am I not parsing your sentence correctly?
Oh, and I was joking.
> Why do you think that offering a fixed service version
> yourself is not a viable option?
Because it's all about the content, not the program delivering the
content. Running scoop on my own server won't fix any problems I might
have with k5.
Reply to:
- 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>
- Re: APSL 2.0
- From: MJ Ray <markj@cloaked.freeserve.co.uk>