On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 12:17:25PM +0530, Nilesh Patra wrote: > Hi, in the rr/README, it states: "If you prefer, you can consider the code in this package, and this package only, to be licensed under the MIT license instead." > > This is not clear as to what the license is and I have a feeling that FTP masters will not like it. > Can you open up an issue on amfora GitHub repository and ask makeworld there as to what should be the license? > Since the record of such a conversation would be public, we can justify in d/copyright proper licensed for everything. I opened a github issues yesterday for clarification[1], and upstream responded that it can be considered dual licensed, but for Debian, GPL-3.0 works. Is that enough justification to leave it GPL-3.0? Or should it go in as dual licensed? Looking through the packaging docs[2], I found the syntax for dual license is, Files: rr/* Copyright: 2020 makeworld <colecmac@protonmail.com> License: GPL-3+ or Expat And include the Expat license text in debian/copyright. Let me know which is the best way to proceed, thank you. 1. https://github.com/makeworld-the-better-one/amfora/issues/230 2. https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/ -- Micheal Waltz https://keybase.io/ecliptik GPG Fingerprint: 5F70 F2AC BD58 F580 DF15 3D1F 4FA2 70F5 CD36 71F9
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature