Raphael Hertzog wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, 12 Nov 2009, Guillem Jover wrote: > > Hi! > > > > This is something that has been bothering me for a long time, so the > > other day I sat down and did a full license audit of the sources. > > > > I've cleaned up the license headers and added missing ones, as a side > > effect ???licensecheck -r dpkg??? works better now. There's still lots of > > copyright statements missing, I have a patch around to add few, but > > every file takes time digging, and there's probably more urgent things > > to tend to. I'd like to get all GPL code unified as GPL-2+, > > eventually, though. > > > > The remaining issues, which might need asking people around are: > > > > * dselect/methods/multicd/*: GPL-2 only > > > > The dselect-multicd method from the dpkg-multicd package, states on > > its debian/copyright to be based on builtin methods from dselect, > > but then has a license of GPL-2 only, while dselect has GPL-2+. > > > > * dselect/methods/Debian/Dselect/Ftp.pm: No header > > dselect/methods/ftp/*: GPL (no version) > > > > The dselect-ftp method from the dpkg-ftp package, states on its > > debian/copyright file to be under the GPL-2 only. Ideally this > > would have the same terms as the rest of the code base, in case > > code needs to be reused for example. > > I'm ccing all the people listed in the copyright. Please respond and > tell us whether you agree to change the license of your code to "GPLv2 or > later" instead of the "GPLv2 only"? I agree. Regards, Joey -- The MS-DOS filesystem is nice for removable media. -- H. Peter Anvin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature