Re: Why is firebird in Debian? (original) (raw)
[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
- To: debian-legal@lists.debian.org
- Subject: Re: Why is firebird in Debian?
- From: Walter Landry <wlandry@ucsd.edu>
- Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 23:43:17 -0700 (PDT)
- Message-id: <[🔎] 20070719.234317.74755203.walter@geodynamics.org>
- In-reply-to: <[🔎] 20070720004046.GA10171@azure.humbug.org.au>
- References: <[🔎] 20070718235809.3945e9b2.frx@firenze.linux.it> <[🔎] 20070720004046.GA10171@azure.humbug.org.au>
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au wrote:
On Wed, Jul 18, 2007 at 11:58:09PM +0200, Francesco Poli wrote:
It is my opinion that the MPL license fails to meet the DFSG. This opinion seems to be shared by other debian-legal regulars:
The MPL is an accepted license for main. I'm sorry your opinion differs, and that the views of other non-DDs and non-maintainers on the matter have gone uncorrected and left the misleading impression that there's any question as to whether the MPL is suitable for main.
So where is the source for old versions stored? The alioth CVS is not publicly available.
Cheers, Walter Landry wlandry@ucsd.edu
Reply to:
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Why is firebird in Debian?
* From: Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au
- Re: Why is firebird in Debian?
- References:
- Why is firebird in Debian?
* From: Francesco Poli frx@firenze.linux.it - Re: Why is firebird in Debian?
* From: Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au
- Why is firebird in Debian?
- Prev by Date:Re: Bacula and OpenSSL
- Next by Date:Re: Bacula and OpenSSL
- Previous by thread:Re: Why is firebird in Debian?
- Next by thread:Re: Why is firebird in Debian?
- Index(es):