Re: (fwd) pfb2t1c2pfb 0.2 released, debian package ready for sponsoring on tug
On 03.11.05 Atsuhito Kohda (kohda@pm.tokushima-u.ac.jp) wrote:
> From: Hilmar Preusse <hille42@web.de>
Hi,
> > I know a few other DD's here in Munich and in Darmstadt (where I
> > lived before).
>
> Good to know. Well, have you already done ITP of pfb2t1c2pfb?
>
Will do so ASAP.
> > I've just chosen you both as we work together now for
> > 2 years (you're able to evaluate the work I do) and you both are
> > involved in teTeX packaging.
>
> I highly evaluate your work and hope you will become DD.
>
> Well I know TeX to some extent (but not so much about fonts) and I
> have maintained packages rather long time but note this means my
> technique might be a bit old fashioned, for example, I have not
> used pbuilder, ucf, dpatch etc. yet. Is this okay for you?
>
As I don't use ucf and dpatch either in my package we don't have to
care I guess.
> Anyway I'll take a look at your package.
>
I've contacted already Martin Helas. He had a few remarks, I have to
fulfill, before I proceed:
<snip>
in general i have no problem sponsoring the upload of your package.
But i have a few comments:
* I cannot find any ITP/RFP/ITA for the package in the debian BTS.
* There is no "Public Domain" in German Law. I don't know for Austrian,
but i guess it is the same.
* even if there is PD in Austria the mails from your upstream in
debian/copyright should be digitaly signed, so everyone can see this
mails are from him. It might not been needed, but it makes it easier
if the are in the initial upload, as Joerg Jaspert might complain if
they are not. It makes things go smoother in the NEW-Queue.
* your changelog entry "and may be distributed and modified (with
permission from the author)" might be read as: "you may only
distribute and/or only modify, if the author gives its permission."
This would fail with DFSG §1, §3 and §5 and therefore be non-free or
not even that.
Greetings
Martin
<snap>
H.
--
http://www.hilmar-preusse.de.vu/
Reply to: