Re: ii package license

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 04:05:43PM +0100, Matěj Cepl wrote:
> On 3.2.2012 12:57, Josh Boyer wrote:
> >It's similar to WTFPL, but not enough to be called that.  Spot is
> >at FOSDEM, so this will probably need to wait until he looks it
> >over.  If it were me, I'd ask upstream to relicense it to something
> >a bit more standard in any case.
> 
> "ask upstream"? You must be new here.
> 
> This is from the upstream which one of his programs have this as
> enlisted advantage of the program: "Because dwm is customized
> through editing its source code, it’s pointless to make binary
> packages of it. This keeps its userbase small and elitist. No
> novices asking stupid questions."
> 
> Matěj

Well, dwm's mostly work of other SL folks and this is a different
story :) Oh, and it's also in Fedora, if you're interested.

-P

Attachment: pgpo4RJVMC81X.pgp
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
legal mailing list
legal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/legal

[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Big List of Linux Books]     [Yosemite News]     [Gnome Users]     [KDE Users]

  Powered by Linux