Go to:
Gentoo Home
Documentation
Forums
Lists
Bugs
Planet
Store
Wiki
Get Gentoo!
Gentoo's Bugzilla – Attachment 77130 Details for
Bug 111340
There's no gnat 2005 ebuild
Home
|
New
–
[Ex]
|
Browse
|
Search
|
Privacy Policy
|
[?]
|
Reports
|
Requests
|
Help
|
New Account
|
Log In
[x]
|
Forgot Password
Login:
[x]
email exchange w AdaCore - letter2
AdaCore.let2 (text/plain), 4.29 KB, created by
George Shapovalov (RETIRED)
on 2006-01-14 16:16:29 UTC
(
hide
)
Description:
email exchange w AdaCore - letter2
Filename:
MIME Type:
Creator:
George Shapovalov (RETIRED)
Created:
2006-01-14 16:16:29 UTC
Size:
4.29 KB
patch
obsolete
>From dewar@adacore.com Sat Jan 14 18:37:19 2006 >X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.0-gr0 (2005-09-13) on aldar.unige.ch >X-Spam-Level: >X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham > version=3.1.0-gr0 >X-Gmail-Received: 36caaa23357faf796359847034db50f4002b1278 >Delivered-To: gshapovalov@gmail.com >Received: by 10.36.140.15 with SMTP id n15cs401nzd; > Sat, 14 Jan 2006 09:37:21 -0800 (PST) >Received: by 10.36.9.16 with SMTP id 16mr3575201nzi; > Sat, 14 Jan 2006 09:37:21 -0800 (PST) >Return-Path: <dewar@adacore.com> >Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [134.68.220.30]) > by mx.gmail.com with ESMTP id 14si3758674nzp.2006.01.14.09.37.20; > Sat, 14 Jan 2006 09:37:21 -0800 (PST) >Received-SPF: neutral (gmail.com: 134.68.220.30 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of dewar@adacore.com) >Received: from nile.gnat.com ([205.232.38.5]) > by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.54) > id 1ExpL6-0004Cx-96; Sat, 14 Jan 2006 17:37:20 +0000 >Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) > by filtered-nile.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B413348CBE8; > Sat, 14 Jan 2006 12:37:19 -0500 (EST) >Received: from nile.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) > by localhost (nile.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP > id 01439-01; Sat, 14 Jan 2006 12:37:19 -0500 (EST) >Received: from [127.0.0.1] (dhcp10.gnat.com [205.232.38.232]) > by nile.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C85648CBE9; > Sat, 14 Jan 2006 12:37:19 -0500 (EST) >Message-ID: <43C936CF.2070700@adacore.com> >Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 12:37:19 -0500 >From: Robert Dewar <dewar@adacore.com> >User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (Windows/20050716) >X-Accept-Language: en-us, en >MIME-Version: 1.0 >To: George Shapovalov <george@gentoo.org> >CC: ada@gentoo.org >Subject: Re: inclusion og gnat-gpl-2005 in Gentoo Linux >References: <200601141738.25754.george@gentoo.org> <43C92C37.7060500@adacore.com> <200601141825.57882.george@gentoo.org> >In-Reply-To: <200601141825.57882.george@gentoo.org> >Content-Type: text/plain; > charset=ISO-8859-1; > format=flowed >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at nile.gnat.com >X-Bogosity: Unsure, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.500000, version=1.0.1 >X-UID: >Status: R >X-Status: NC >X-KMail-EncryptionState: >X-KMail-SignatureState: >X-KMail-MDN-Sent: > >George Shapovalov wrote: > >>Thanks for quick reply Robert! >> >>So, it seems that the easiest and safest way for us is to prepare a "snapshot" >>of the source based on the version I recently downloaded, adding the two >>missing files, and put it up at our location, allowing mirrors to pick it up >>in the usual way. >> >> >Yes, that would certainly be fine, though see below > >>For the legal stuff: >>We do *not* distribute binaries where we can avoid that (I suppose this is >>what you are refering to when saying "distribute the program" as opposed to >>"distribute the sources"), and this is the case here. We allways distributre >>software in source form if we can. In fact, technically, it may be argued >>that in the majority of cases (where the source is under "free" license and >>SRC_URI has proper upstream location, so this probably does not apply if we >>mirror the source ourselves) we do not perform a distribution in the usual >>sense at all - we only distribute the installation instructions and users >>carry them out locally, in automated way, using the software we produce. >> >> >OK, if you are not distributing the binaries, then it is fine to refer >to the sources >at the libre site in any way. > >>Also, we allways provide a copy of the license for any package that is in our >>repository (of course only one version of each for the common ones, such as >>GPL-2 or BSD) (this is even used by portage to place additional restrictions >>on availability of packages, should user want to choose not to install >>packages covered by a certain license), plus install the licenses along with >>the docs for individual packages, where appropriate. >> >> >As long as you are not distributing biaries, then everything is just >fine, as >you say above, you are not distributing binaries in the GPL sense at all. > >>AFAIK this procedure has been cleared with our lawer(s) a few years ago, >>however if you want to look into this closer, please send me your questions >>about any specifics and I will raise them with our team. >> >> >Sounds OK to me. > > >
You cannot view the attachment while viewing its details because your browser does not support IFRAMEs.
View the attachment on a separate page
.
View Attachment As Raw
Actions:
View
Attachments on
bug 111340
:
75917
|
75918
|
76484
|
76485
|
76486
|
76488
|
76493
|
76780
|
76781
|
76784
|
76785
|
77129
| 77130 |
77288
|
77374
|
85982
|
87502