Hi, I uploaded pathogen. Thanks. On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 11:15:07PM -0400, Barry deFreese wrote: >> That's just a request, not a blocker. ;-) The thing that is a problem >> is that you didn't add yourself as a copyright holder. For the others, >> you can appearantly not get more info, so you can leave it like this. >> But you should be able to contact yourself and write a proper copyright >> and license statement for your parts of the packaging. ;-) >> > Well I was going to try to make it machine readable but it's such a mess > I'm just not sure. That's a very good reason to use the format IMO. It forces you to be aware of what you're writing. If you don't know things for sure, and want to be vague, you will actually have to write that you don't know and that it's vague (and which parts). That's a very good thing for such documentation (which must be as complete as possible). > I'm not quite sure what "compatible" license it is.. Compatible? With what? That's a word usually used with GPL licensed stuff. There isn't anything GPL in there, right? > I also fixed some manpages warnings/informationals.. Good. > I would really appreciate a good look-over of what I did with the > copyright file in xlife.. As I wrote, I think this is a very good package to use the machine-readable format, to make sure that it is clear which message belongs to which files. You need to add license information for your packaging work; if you choose to use the same license as the package, it's different from the rest of the packaging, which is only assumed to be under the same license. I'd use something like this: Files: debian/* Copyright: Copyright 1996 Dave Holland <93djh2@eng.cam.ac.uk> Copyright 2000 Edward Betts <edward@debian.org> Copyright 2000 Goswin Brederlow <goswin.brederlow@student.uni-tuebingen.de> License: other An attempt was made to contact the original packager and was unsuccessful so the packaging is assumed to be licensed under the same license as the source code. See above. Files: debian/* Copyright: Copyright 2008 Barry deFreese <bddebian@comcast.net> License: other This packaging is licensed under the same license as the source code. See above. I'm not sure if this is the proper way to add different licenses to the same files, but it seems good to me. You may want to check the wiki if it says anything about this. >> Thanks, > No, THANK YOU. :) No, I insist; thank _you_. ;-) Bas -- I encourage people to send encrypted e-mail (see http://www.gnupg.org). If you have problems reading my e-mail, use a better reader. Please send the central message of e-mails as plain text in the message body, not as HTML and definitely not as MS Word. Please do not use the MS Word format for attachments either. For more information, see http://pcbcn10.phys.rug.nl/e-mail.html
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature