Copyright arrangements for a web project
ballombe at debian.org
Sat Dec 14 20:09:47 UTC 2013
On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 12:32:59PM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > > Nevertheless your opinion is interesting to me [...]
> > [explanations]
> Thanks for that.
If you find clarification of the license that are grounded in the actual
text and written by B. Kuhn or the FSF, please forward them.
> > > > But it is probably not the right venue to discuss the AGPLv3.
> > >
> > > Perhaps not. But I don't want to use debian-legal whose focus is
> > > on DFSG compatibility and whose on-list consensus judgements don't
> > > always seem to align with the actual decisions of those responsible
> > > for these judgements within Debian.
> > Why do you assume I do ?
> I'm sorry to have apparently offended you. I didn't intend to imply
> that you had suggested debian-legal. It seemed to me that
> debian-legal was an obvious possible place for this conversation and I
> was explaining why I chose not to use it.
Sorry, I just wanted to warn you that I was far from having the majority
opinion in Debian. (We need to fix debian-legal, but this is another
Bill. <ballombe at debian.org>
Imagine a large red swirl here.
More information about the Spi-general