Hi
On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 00:46:58 +1000
Ben Finney <bignose+hates-spam@benfinney.id.au> wrote:
> Because I'm applying for Debian Maintainer status, and I'd like to be
> able to make use of that with this package in future releases.
>
> Should I not do this?
I won't upload package with DM-Upload-Allowed unless I'm confident that
the maintainer will not break something in next uploads. And I can not
say this when uploading package for first time.
> The terms currently available at that URL, and those directly included
> with the package ('docs/license.txt' in the source) are identical to
> the terms of the Expat license.
>
> See the explanation at
> <URL:http://wiki.debian.org/Proposals/CopyrightFormat#head-efd90160bd80efbe27609100a3e0b055774cf0e9>
> for the explanation of why the name "Expat" is simpler and less
> ambiguous than "MIT" when referring to those license terms.
>
> This might be an issue worth taking up with the upstream developer (a
> request to simply change the name used to refer to the exact same
> license terms), but regardless should not IMO impact being able to
> release the package.
Ah okay then.
I uploaded the package without DM-Upload-Allowed, if you need it to
upload new version, just drop me an email with [sponsoring] somewhere
in subject.
--
Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature