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 <firstname.lastname@example.org> escribió:
> De: Eddy Petrișor <email@example.com>
> Asunto: What license for our packaging?
> Para: "Debian Games Team" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Fecha: sábado, 23 agosto, 2008 10:40
> (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. 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 for all our packages.
> I propose that, from now on, we use the BSD license for our
> What do you think?
>  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)
>  of course, packages we take over might need
> special-casing for the license and might default to
> other license
>  since I found it very useful that MadCoder used the BSD
> license and I was able to use the code
> without any troubles
Espacio para todos tus mensajes, antivirus y antispam ¡gratis!
Regístrate ya - http://correo.yahoo.es