Message72882
On 2008-09-09 17:54, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
> Martin v. Löwis <martin@v.loewis.de> added the comment:
>
> I don't think this needs to be resolved before 2.6, not without a
> pronouncement from a lawyer advising the PSF. Layman's analyses of legal
> issues are void.
>
> Thus lowering the priority.
That's an interesting argument :-) What makes you think that a
layman's judgment over a layman's analysis is not void as well ?
Rather than arguing about the necessity of including the license
of a 3rd party file that we intend to include in a wide-spread
software release, wouldn't it be easier to just add the file
and be done with it, like I suggested at the very beginning of
this discussion ? |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2008-09-09 16:31:35 | lemburg | set | recipients:
+ lemburg, loewis, mhammond, barry, theller |
2008-09-09 16:31:34 | lemburg | link | issue3617 messages |
2008-09-09 16:31:34 | lemburg | create | |
|