Spdx-legal@lists.spdx.org

Home Messages Hashtags Subgroups

Messages

Between

and

Re: [spdx] Chime instead of Zoom, a modest proposal

Quoting Jeremiah C. Foster (2020-04-15 18:57:24) For the pragmatic angle of "does it work reliably" I agree that Jitsi is a viable option. Any conferencing service _can_ become unreliable when

By Jonas Smedegaard · #2785 ·

Re: Chime instead of Zoom, a modest proposal

"James Bottomley" <James.Bottomley@...> writes: Yeah, FSF is running an instance that is being used to successfully teach classes at MIT right now. We'll post more about it soon,

By John Sullivan <johns@...> · #2784 ·

Re: Chime instead of Zoom, a modest proposal

The good folks at FSFE maintain a wiki page with Free Software alternatives: https://wiki.fsfe.org/Activities/FreeSoftware4RemoteWorking I should point out that in the SPDX calls we don't actually

By Alexios Zavras · #2783 ·

Re: Chime instead of Zoom, a modest proposal

I have not the technical expertise to judge the security level of the following solution that works with Zoom on Linux: https://www.linux.com/news/how-to-install-and-use-firejail-on-linux/ ---- For

By Till Jaeger · #2782 ·

Re: Chime instead of Zoom, a modest proposal

Wow that's a blast from the early part of this millenium. Since Linux now runs over 80% of the world's computing resources, I thought we'd got over stigmatizing people who actually run it on their

By James Bottomley · #2781 ·

Re: Chime instead of Zoom, a modest proposal

I've used the Linux Zoom client nearly every day for a few weeks now, and less often for several months before that. It's been seamless for all the core talk-and-watch functionality. It does lag a

By Kyle Mitchell · #2780 ·

Re: Chime instead of Zoom, a modest proposal

wrote: So no app for Linux then? As you can appreciate, a lot of us have now been evaluating a whole range of video conference technologies and one of the empirical rules I've been seeing is that

By James Bottomley · #2779 ·

Re: Chime instead of Zoom, a modest proposal

Hi Mark, Thanks for the generous offer. :-) We're not paying for zoom, however I'm definitely up for doing an experiment during our spdx-tech meeting tomorrow, and if it works for the regular

By Kate Stewart · #2778 ·

Chime instead of Zoom, a modest proposal

Hi Kate and other SPDX folk, We have been using Zoom to provide teleconference for SPDX meetings. In light of recent events, Zoom has gotten very popular, and also been failing many security audits,

By Mark Atwood (Amazon.com) · #2777 ·

milestones for SPDX License List

Hi all, We’ve been doing quarterly releases for new SPDX License List versions on a calendar quarterly basis. We adopted this some time ago (before using Github) to provide some expectation and

By J Lovejoy · #2776 ·

Meeting today, Apr. 9

Hello all, the next regularly-scheduled SPDX legal team meeting will be today, Thursday, Apr. 9 at 9AM PDT / noon EDT. The primary agenda item will be to discuss license requests currently tagged for

By Steve Winslow · #2775 ·

Re: New License/Exception Request: The 0810 Software simple and permissive open source license (rev. 1.0)

Hello Marnix, thank you for your email. You can submit this as a license for consideration in the SPDX license list repo, at https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues, for the community to

By Steve Winslow · #2774 ·

New License/Exception Request: The 0810 Software simple and permissive open source license (rev. 1.0)

Hello dear SPDX moderators, I have created an open-source license that I published through my organisation (0810 Software) and I would like it to get indexed on your list. The license is

By Marnix B <programmer.marxin0810@...> · #2773 ·

Re: MIT License

Hello, The SPDX legal team list is used for the development of the SPDX License List at https://spdx.org/licenses. However, this list is not used for providing legal advice about the interpretation of

By Steve Winslow · #2772 ·

MIT License

Hi, can anyone explain the MIT License point that says to include the license of used code, but can it be included inside the file but not directly with copied code?

By ashkardev@... · #2771 ·

License list - 3.9 issues

Hello spdx-legal list, This is a friendly reminder that the next release of the License List (version 3.9) is targeted for the end of April. I'd encourage folks to review the list of open issues,

By Steve Winslow · #2770 ·

Re: CERN-OHL version 2

Hi Andrew, Great! FYI - this email got moderated because you are not on the mailing list with this address. I have unmoderated you, but would be best if you could join the mailing list or use the

By J Lovejoy · #2769 ·

CERN-OHL version 2

Hi All Now that version 2 of CERN-OHL has been released, we are keen to see the 3 variants allocated an appropriate SPDX licence identifier. You can find the licences here:

By Andrew <andrewjskatz@...> · #2768 ·

SPDX License List inclusion principles and 3.9 release

Hello all, Following from Jilayne's email earlier this month, the legal team has now finalized and posted the update to the license inclusion principles for the SPDX License List. The updated

By Steve Winslow · #2767 ·

SPDX legal team call tomorrow

Hi all, The SPDX legal team has its regular bi-weekly call tomorrow, Thursday at noon, Eastern Daylight Savings time (note: The US moved our clocks forward, but I believe the UK and Europe has yet to

By J Lovejoy · #2766 ·

621 - 640 of 3405

Home Hashtags Subgroups Terms