On 2013-06-21, at 21:13, Spiro Trikaliotis wrote: > Note that SF and/or github might have problems with that source, as it > might not exactly fit their (or the) definition of open-source. ;) ? Isn't copyright for that already expired? I am not a law expert on the matter but I thought it expired when VICE team started to provide own copies. >> If there is some moementum we could possibly push it now. > > If wanted, I could put a git server on my web. Additionally, I could put > my reversed sources on the web. I fear people are starting this over and > over again. Instead of everyone doing it on his own (and stopping > somewhere in between), it would be good if people could cooperate. That's exactly what I meant. I did some parts, then found somebody else did similar, etc. The same with those books. I corrected many typos (possibly most were OCR artefacts) and some errors too. But all of it remains on my harddrives.. I bet many people did similar things on their own. -- SD! Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing listReceived on 2013-06-21 22:00:12
Archive generated by hypermail 2.2.0.