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

Rv: What license for our packaging?

I'm forwarding this from the Alioth mailing list to the main one.


--- El sáb, 23/8/08, Eddy Petrișor <eddy.petrisor@gmail.com> escribió:

> De: Eddy Petrișor <eddy.petrisor@gmail.com>
> Asunto: What license for our packaging?
> Para: "Debian Games Team" <pkg-games-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org>
> Fecha: sábado, 23 agosto, 2008 10:40
> Hello,
> (Note that there is a different mail that starts with a
> similar paragraph, so please read both).
> Toady I was working on the wormux package and I had to add
> some packaging copyright attribution to 
> the debian/copyright[0]. I started modifying the
> debian/copyright file to be automatically parsable, 
> then I was struck by the fact that we haven't
> explicitly licensed the wormux packaging, so I was 
> unable to do properly the modification.
> So, as a team policy, I would like to propose we settle on
> a license that we use for packaging, by 
> default[1] for all our packages.
> I propose that, from now on, we use the BSD license for our
> packaging[2].
> What do you think?
> [0] I 'borrowed' MadCoder's refresh-patches
> mechanism from the tokyocabinet package (seen it in 
> MadCoder's packaging with git presentation). I checked
> the license terms/incompatibilities I saw 
> that packaging was BSD licensed (cool)
> [1] of course, packages we take over might need
> special-casing for the license and might default to 
> other license
> [2] since I found it very useful that MadCoder used the BSD
> license and I was able to use the code 
> without any troubles
> -- 
> Regards,
> EddyP

Correo Yahoo!
Espacio para todos tus mensajes, antivirus y antispam ¡gratis! 
Regístrate ya - http://correo.yahoo.es

Reply to: