Re: [UPLOADED] hex-a-hop (updated package)
On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 03:38:06PM +0200, Bas Wijnen wrote:
> I uploaded the package. I still have some comments (see below), but
> they weren't enough reason to not upload.
Thanks.
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 12:20:11AM +0200, Jens Seidel wrote:
> > > this is a "GPL without version" claim, which according to the GPL
> > > means any version is acceptable. I
> >
> > It's still "GPL without version". I need the permission of Miriam and
> > maybe others before I can change it.
>
> Strictly speaking, you don't. You can choose to accept any version, for
> example "all versions >= 2", like the game itself is licensed. Then you
> have the right to distribute using that license.
>
> However, I agree it is nice to ask people what they intended, and not
> remove license options without reason.
OK, will probably do this with the next upload.
> > > - The manual page mentions the license. This is not required, but if
> > > you do it, it would be good to point to /usr/share/common-licenses for
> > > the complete text.
> >
> > Not done. This would unfuzzy all translations. This is not necessary and
> > would be Debian specific.
>
> What I meant is that if you consider license information of any value to
> the reader of the manual page, it should contain a link to the actual
> license text (it can be on the internet as well). In fact, I expect it
> not to add much value at all, and I would have removed it completely.
> But it's up to you, and if you like it better this way, again, it's not
> wrong.
Still not sure about it. I thought most GPL license statements occur
without a reference to the full license as GPL is very well known.
> > > On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 01:15:04AM +0200, Jens Seidel wrote:
> > I called lintian on the .dsc file instead the .changes file :-)
>
> Ok, that's also something you shouldn't do. :-) Perhaps lintian should
> warn about it...
I opened already #441636 but it will probably be rejected as lintian works
on .dsc files as well -- just differently.
Jens
Reply to: