Re: ad hoc license: is it DFSG-conformant ?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
Hello Forum:
On 12/03/16 03:39, Ben Finney wrote:
> Jerome BENOIT <calculus@rezozer.net> writes:
>
>> On 11/03/16 21:15, Riley Baird wrote:
>>> That licence is fine.
>>>
>> So now step forward in peace.
>
> Before achieving peace, please see the rest of the thread in
> ‘debian-legal’; I disagree with Riley's assessment.
>
Please let me know if would be good idea to contact the upstream team to clarify their Copyright.
According to you, which classical (and DFSG-conformant) copyright may fulfil their wish ?
Thanks,
Jerome
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJW45r6AAoJEIC/w4IMSybj/osH/juJMFvvWmIP2i0gJ4hdiKdV
T97Groav7cinXTkyHYPVmBf7YYrOU8c1u1i15cdq4mhNy+LQTi+rEf9pQfJOp8C8
vZpMW8KgUcD500dpUUZXdrR7wD27b3LJsy0KCiOKexK/LKrPf1zlXpu0ZufQSazT
iMW3XRH4vOt2wSFdOYrSVMTFzWaOLV7pmkqCfxwv3bIS1tONz3HaXeBujppi+RKc
Rt5eAD8EKfkEoPn1VQsQ+FSjgm95F4VMlTmMqBzg1sSFYgLyUVXIuYthapSn0s8w
o1+4hB6JWS70b/8aPxHg6lm7mGUASTCqwpuMw03+e+bU+F5YG45V91QZ5DVijs0=
=I026
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: