[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Canaima Derivative

On 07/01/12 23:07, Paul Wise wrote:
> 2012/1/8 Luis Alejandro Martinez Faneyth:
>> I've updated the Debian Derivative Census page for Canaima[1], thanks
>> for the great technical and statistic work you are doing.
> Excellent, thank you very much.
> I am extremely concerned that Canaima is not distributing source code
> for some of the suites. At the very least this means you are violating
> copyright law due to dpkg, apt and other Debian-specific software
> being licensed under the GNU General Public License, which is a
> copyleft license that requires distribution of source code.

Oh, yes. We are aware of that. Let me explain.

Currently we have four publicly available suites:

"Antiguo" (Old-Stable), currently Canaima 2.1 (codename 'aponwao'),
"Estable" (Stable), currently Canaima 3.0 (codename 'roraima'),
"Pruebas" (Testing), currently Canaima 3.1 (codename 'auyantepui'),
"Desarrollo" (Development), currently empty (probably Canaima 3.2 or
4.0, depending on wheezy freeze).

We started shipping deb-src with Canaima 3.1, so previous releases
didn't have them. Nonetheless, we always keep available our source code
in our VCS[1].

We are going to rebuild source packages for 2.1 and 3.0 releases so that
all sources for all suites are available, but this is going to take some
time as we are a relatively little developer team[2] currently focused
on releasing Canaima 3.1.

>> I was wondering how to get Canaima listed on the "children-distros"
>> page[2] on Debian's main portal.
> This is a discussion that has been pending with the Debian website
> team for a while. Last year I was asked to defer it and have not had
> time to restart the discussion. I will start a new thread about it on
> this list today.

ok, thanks!

Luis Alejandro Martínez Faneyth
Blog: http://www.huntingbears.com.ve/
Twitter/Identi.ca: @LuisAlejandro
ED51 8FE7 4107 715D 0464  8366 F614 5A95 E78D AA2E


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply to: