I am looking for a commercial staff vacation planner with the following features:
- is compatible with SharePoint 2013 Standard Edition
- allows multiple managers to approve an employee’s request
- skips holidays and weekends; a request from friday to monday should result in two days of vacation taken (not in four)
I’ve searched for solutions but most of them require an additional account at a website.
Q: What products can you recommend?
I help businesses DEFINE their brand image & gain a clear-cut COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE through SIMPLICITY & CLARITY, thus seamlessly CONNECTING your brand to your target audience. Designing with PURPOSE, using my PROVEN design process & PROBLEM-SOLVING strategy, I can GUARANTEE results fast. Ready to MAKE your MARK, Let’s talk! • Logo Design • Corporate Brand Identity Design • Branding & Brand Strategy • Full Service Graphic Design help businesses DEFINE their brand image & gain a clear-cut COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE through SIMPLICITY & CLARITY, thus seamlessly CONNECTING your brand to your target audience. Designing with PURPOSE, using my PROVEN design process & PROBLEM-SOLVING strategy, I can GUARANTEE results fast. Ready to MAKE your MARK, Let’s talk! • Logo Design • Corporate Brand Identity Design • Branding & Brand Strategy • Full Service Graphic Design
Category: Graphics & Logos
I know the open source licenses quite well, they usually solve the problem of redistribution, derivative work and commercial use from an open source code point of view. I am interested in the opposite. Is there a prebuilt, common license for source code which?: * Allows commercial use. * Allows derivative work. * But prohibits to relicense to an open-source license.
I’m quite confused about what are the obligations of GPL libraries in the context of plugin based software.
Let’s say I want to distribute & sell a plugin based app as closed source providing to the users a set of closed source core plugins as well.
Here’s the thing, if both the plugin framework and core plugins are not using any GPL deps and assuming they’re not violating license terms of possible deps should not be mandatory to open source any of the code.
Now, here’s my question… what happens if some of the plugins (be it plugins either created by the company or by users) use GPL dependencies… Would the GPL dependencies only affect to the plugin(s) or would also infect the host and other closed-source plugins?
Common sense suggests that only the source code of plugins using GPL deps should be opened but considering GPL is virical & nasty I’m not sure anymore.
In fact, if that was the case (which would be crazy), as a user, you could argue companies to open source a whole host app in case you’ve added a plugin that uses GPL code on a plugin for that host… couldn’t you?
- You’ve created a driver for windows that uses GPL code, would Microsoft be forced to open source the OS?
- You’ve created a plugin for SublimeText/VisualStudio/3dsMax/(whatever closed source plugin based software goes here) that uses GPL code, would these companies be forced to open source the hosts?
Summing up, could anyone clarify here which type of code GPL libraries would infect directly/indirectly?
Ps. Reason I’ve opened this thread is because I’ve found this answer and I found it pretty confusing, specially the part where he says:
(b) If you do distribute YOUR APPLICATION, and you used something GPL as part of your application (even if only linking at run-time to a library) – and even if you do not charge money – and even if you do not change that GPL s/w in any way – then you MUST make the source of YOUR APPLICATION available.
how would you interpret that statement?
I’m trying to find info on CORBA threading mechanism but can only find articles on commercial applications such as HP ORBPlus and BEA Tuxedo.
I’m developing a commercial application. During setup I show End User that my software could use other third party software. On First launch of my application End User is invited to click a button to download an orginal portable .zip version of a freeware program. He can accept or not. This program will be launched from my application GUI. I don’t distribute this freeware, I ask only to download it or not. Then extract the portable package. No modification at all. A last thing, this portable .zip freeware, is untouched and it will be downloaded from my site. This to avoid freeware updates causing possible crash with my GUI. Is all this legal? I hope in your reply Thanks a lot in advance.
I’m a freelance web developer from Morocco, I started a small business for selling car parts 4 years ago and have legal documents …etc, I stopped the business 1 year after and focused on freelancing which I’ve been doing for more than 7 years but started full time just couple of years ago. However, I still have the legal documents for selling car parts…etc
Now I have a conference invitation in Germany related to web development and the work I do as a freelancer, I have proves of income from freelance clients, and have letter from a company I work with. My question is: – Should I include the car parts business papers with these documents in the application or not, knowing it’s completely unrelated to what I do at the moment.
[Download] Dandrew Media (Sal Buscemi) – Commercial Deal Maker Mastery
This high level exclusive training gives you everything you need to become a highly paid deal maker, intermediary, and consultant.
Attract as many clients and investors as you can handle. You’ll get all the tools and strategies to.
– Analyze and structure deals
– Raise unlimited capital
– Find the most profitable properties
– Launch a massively lucrative commercial deal making…
[Download] Dandrew Media (Sal Buscemi) – Commercial Deal Maker Mastery
I’m trying to install a Godaddy wildcard SSL certificate on AWS Lightsail (Ubuntu/Nginx). The
nginx.conf is mainly the default one that gets installed with nginx…
I did a
sudo nginx -t and everything looked good so I restarted nginx. In a browser I get “This site can’t be reached”. When I do a curl it hangs. I’ve turned debug on for the error.log, so now I get an error like this…
2019/03/30 22:08:13 [debug] 11579#11579: accept on 0.0.0.0:80, ready: 0 2019/03/30 22:08:13 [debug] 11579#11579: posix_memalign: 0000557BF61CDE90:512 @16 2019/03/30 22:08:13 [debug] 11579#11579: *2 accept: 184.108.40.206:55888 fd:3 2019/03/30 22:08:13 [debug] 11579#11579: *2 event timer add: 3: 60000:1079834032 2019/03/30 22:08:13 [debug] 11579#11579: *2 reusable connection: 1 2019/03/30 22:08:13 [debug] 11579#11579: *2 epoll add event: fd:3 op:1 ev:80002001 2019/03/30 22:08:26 [debug] 11579#11579: *2 http wait request handler 2019/03/30 22:08:26 [debug] 11579#11579: *2 malloc: 0000557BF61CE8A0:1024 2019/03/30 22:08:26 [debug] 11579#11579: *2 recv: eof:1, avail:1 2019/03/30 22:08:26 [debug] 11579#11579: *2 recv: fd:3 0 of 1024 2019/03/30 22:08:26 [info] 11579#11579: *2 client closed connection while waiting for request, client: 220.127.116.11, server: 0.0.0.0:80 2019/03/30 22:08:26 [debug] 11579#11579: *2 close http connection: 3 2019/03/30 22:08:26 [debug] 11579#11579: *2 event timer del: 3: 1079834032 2019/03/30 22:08:26 [debug] 11579#11579: *2 reusable connection: 0 2019/03/30 22:08:26 [debug] 11579#11579: *2 free: 0000557BF61CE8A0 2019/03/30 22:08:26 [debug] 11579#11579: *2 free: 0000557BF61CDE90, unused: 120
Any ideas why this isn’t working?
I’m starting a project that involves OCR reading and I was planning to use pytesseract which uses the GPLv3 license. I tried to understand what exactly the GPL license means when it says “modify” but I’m still not sure. If I import and use the library do I then need to release my code under the GPL license?
Also, what does the GPL license mean when it says distribute, if I write a piece of software and charge companies for me to examine their data with it, am I distributing it?
Thank you so much for any help.