[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Current summit
This would be a "suggested" license correct? Not a Required license?
On Fri, 29 Sep 2000, Guylhem Aznar wrote:
>Very few people could made it because of the football game filling up
>every hotel around and Rosh Hashanah starting today.
>However we are doing some great work and would like some immediate
>The most important point is the license policy.
>Since we could not find a good agreement on the licenses, we are
>thinking about merging the LDPL and the LDP Manifesto as the "license
>policy", explaining which license could be used, etc.
>David, what do you think about that? Would you like to take care of the
>merging? We will provide you a draft.
<COMPANY>CommandPrompt - http://www.commandprompt.com </COMPANY>
<PROJECT>OpenDocs, LLC. - http://www.opendocs.org </PROJECT>
<PROJECT>LinuxPorts - http://www.linuxports.com </PROJECT>
<WEBMASTER>LDP - http://www.linuxdoc.org </WEBMASTER>
Instead of asking why a piece of software is using "1970s technology,"
start asking why software is ignoring 30 years of accumulated wisdom.
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to firstname.lastname@example.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact email@example.com