Re: BOINC: lib/cal.h license issue agree with the DFSG?
Marco d'Itri wrote:
> nicolas.alvarez@gmail.com wrote:
>
>>How about we try this? Let's assume for a moment that choice-of-venue is
>>both acceptable and allowed by the DFSG. Then look at the *rest* of the
>>cal.h license terms instead of continuing the argument about this one.
>
> As explained, the license does not really matter since function
> definitions usually are not subject to copyright.
[function definitions are the actual code, so I'll assume you meant
declarations]
When was that said? I couldn't find anyone in this thread saying
declarations aren't subject to copyright.
--
Nicolas
(I read mailing lists through Gmane. Please don't Cc me on replies; it makes
me get one message on my newsreader and another on email.)
Reply to: