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

Re: Bug#227793: pgeasy has no copyright

Hi Steve, hi d-legal!

On 2004-03-08 12:59 -0600, Steve Langasek wrote:
> [CC:ed to debian-legal, for sanity checking]

Sounds reasonable ;-)

> If the website is down, how would anyone be able to verify that your
> .orig.tar.gz is pristine source, either?  

I guess only by comparing it to the tarballs on some mirrors. But you
are right, this may become legally difficult as well.

> Therefore, I strongly recommend that you update debian/copyright to
> reflect the actual license of this work, regardless of whether that
> license is currently included in the tarball, and close the RC bug
> accordingly.

If that would be conform to Policy 2.3, I can do that.  Currently
debian/copyright already says that the license is BSD, so I will add
an URL to the web page which declares that.  However, Bruce just replied
yesterday that he will prepare an updated version anyway (I sent him a
new build system and other minor stuff), so I hope that this resolves
cleanly anyway.

> > When the current postgresql finally goes into sarge (I will make an
> > updated upload today or tomorrow), it will be possible to remove
> > pgeasy. I pinged its upstream author (who promised to change that
> > weeks ago) and will do it again, but in the light of the upcoming
> > freeze I will ask for removing pgeasy if upstream does not release an
> > update. Would you agree to this?
> I don't understand this.  Currently, the pgeasy source package *only*
> exists in unstable.  If you want to remove pgeasy, why would this need
> to wait for a new postgresql package in testing?  

This is a bit complicated. The binary package pgeasy does exist in
testing, but up to postgresql-7.4.1-1 it was built out out
postgresql's source tree; its source package amalgated four upstream
tarballs since there had been a time when these packages could be built
only in the postgresql sources. Then I created new build systems for
these auxilliary packages to give them proper source packages. So ATM
pgeasy cannot be removed from testing without removing postgresql as
well, because testing still has postgresql-7.3.x.

> And is this trivially-solvable RC bug your only reason for
> requesting removal?

Yes since it is (or rather, I thought it was) RC and in this case only
upstream can change that. 

But as already said, I hope to get a new upstream package soon. If
not, I will downgrade the RC bug to important, if d-legal agrees.

Any comments?

Thank you and have a nice day!


Martin Pitt                 Debian GNU/Linux Developer
martin@piware.de                      mpitt@debian.org
http://www.piware.de             http://www.debian.org

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: