Archives
Archives
| From: | hasufell <hasufell@g.o> | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| To: | gentoo-dev@l.g.o | ||
| Subject: | Re: [gentoo-dev] Clarify the "as-is" license? | ||
| Date: | Sun, 23 Sep 2012 12:12:57 | ||
| Message-Id: | 505EFC3B.30005@gentoo.org | ||
| In Reply to: | Re: [gentoo-dev] Clarify the "as-is" license? by Ulrich Mueller |
||
| 1 | On 09/23/2012 02:04 PM, Ulrich Mueller wrote: |
| 2 | > If we really decide to move things to a new license file, then I'd |
| 3 | > rather avoid the name "as-is" because it is partly the reason for the |
| 4 | > confusion. |
| 5 | |
| 6 | I agree on that. I saw it more than once that people use "as-is" for the |
| 7 | license, just because there is an "as is" clause. |
| Subject | Author |
|---|---|
| Re: [gentoo-dev] Clarify the "as-is" license? | Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> |
| Re: [gentoo-dev] Clarify the "as-is" license? | Ian Stakenvicius <axs@g.o> |