Re: [AD] giftware license

[Peter Wang <tjaden@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Elias Pschernig wrote:

> On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 22:05:51 +0100, Grzegorz Adam Hankiewicz
> <gradha@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>  
>
> > Commited with very small cosmetic changes.
> >
> >    
>
> Thanks. I just noticed, I forgot the faq._tx in that patch. I lost the
> faq._tx with the latest changes by now, but I applied a version now
> based on the last patch posted here and adding the changes mentioned
> in this thread.
>
> I also tried to synchronize the online version, so it can be seen here
> now: http://alleg.sourceforge.net/faq.html
>  

old:
The Allegro licence is absolutely clear unless you are a a lawyer. 
However it's written quite informal so this mini-FAQ tries to clarify 
some things.

change to:
The Allegro licence is absolutely clear unless you are a lawyer.  
However, it's written quite informally so this mini-FAQ tries to clarify 
some things.

compatible _with_: "It clearly is compatible to all the points in the OSD"


"You can modify Allegro and distribute the modified Allegro under any 
licence you want, *but the original unmodified parts will still be 
licenced under the Allegro licence*."

The *starred* part doesn't make any sense to me.  What's it supposed to 
mean?


Change "We are programmers not lawyers." to "<b><blink>We are 
programmers, not lawyers.</blink></b>"


Peter