On Friday 02 December 2016 16:53:53 Ian Jackson wrote: > Pali Rohár writes ("Re: is igmpproxy dfsg compliant?"): > > On Thursday 24 November 2016 19:29:21 Roberto wrote: > > > On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 06:36:53PM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote: > > > > And can be included igmpproxy package into Debian? > > > > > > Probably asking the authors if they can please switch the > > > license, it will benefit not only Debian but anyone who > > > downloads from upstream source as well. > > > > So... it is enough if all authors and contributors of igmpproxy > > agree that their changes can be redistributed under GPLv2+? > > Yes. Done. Now I all authors and contributors of igmpproxy 0.1 agreed that their changes can be licensed under GPLv2+. I updated igmpproxy on https://mentors.debian.net/package/igmpproxy and included all licenses and agreements from emails into copyright file. I hope that now it is correct and finally GPLv2+ compatible. Can you review proposed package? -- Pali Rohár firstname.lastname@example.org
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.