DISTRIBUTION OF DEBIMG TEMPORARILY STOPPED. MAY BE CONTINUED IN A CORRECT WAY LATER. Am Mittwoch, den 10.09.2008, 11:38 +0200 schrieb Daniel Baumann: > since you did not care to reply to my previous mail[0] yet, I do hereby I'm sorry about this. But I was busy the last days. > once again inform you that you are still violating the GPL2, clause 3, > and do remind you to take the required actions to resolv the situation. For now, I removed public access to the tarballs and the git repository. > As you can see, the version you are embedding in debimg_0.0.1.tar.gz > does not come from Debian. This version was mistakenly taken from the Ubuntu package. > [...]As already said, the Debian policy does not apply to debimg since it is > an unofficial package not included and not distributed within the Debian > distribution. Regardless, you have to comply to the upstream license. I will not distribute stuff violating the Debian policy and have therefore removed public access to them. > > [...] However, you cannot distribute the debian sources under GPL3, since > everything before version 3.70+dfsg-1 has licensed its debian/* under > GPL2 only, not GPL2+. [...] In my opinion the copyright file provided with the package does not specify a specific license version. Instead, it is "licensed under the GPL", which means version 1, 2 or 3. Simply referring to a specific file name is in my eyes no legally correct restriction. Using machine-interpretable copyright can help. Since the syslinux source code is licensed under GPL-2+, the resulting binary is GPL-2+. "The Debian packaging is (C) 2006-2008, Daniel Baumann <daniel@debian.org> and is licensed under the GPL, see /usr/share/common-licenses/GPL-2." -- Julian Andres Klode Debian Maintainer, Ubuntu Member, Fellow of FSFE, Contributing Member of SPI, Developer <http://wiki.debian.org/JulianAndresKlode>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil