Hi Dmitry, Thanks a lot for the very quick reply. [...] > Thanks for review. > > Note that the package has been already uploaded by Tollef Fog Heen. > Oh, I must have missed that message, sorry. [...] > I see how the non-standard preamble can make licensing checking harder > (though, I do not consider it extremly hard). Do you use some tool for > license checking? > Indeed, it's the licensecheck tool. And indeed you'd be putting quite a lot less work on reviewers if some auto-checkable header were used. > Can you please explain how non-standard preamble violates the license > terms? I do not see any requirements on the preamble format in the > Apache license text. Note that the appendix which describes it goes > after the "END OF TERMS AND CONDITIONS" line. > > Do you argue that non-standard preamble renders the package not > apropriate for Debian? > I'm not sure. ftp-master will tell you, but you are probably right that this appendix is not part of the license and hence can safely be ignored. ftp-masters will let you know :-) > > - Your package fails to build: > > > > Ssl.cc: In constructor ‘SslCtx::SslCtx(SslCtx::SslProtocol, const String&)’: > > Ssl.cc:33:27: error: ‘::SSLv2_method’ has not been declared > > > > Other than that the package looks fine to me, but given this FTBFS this review > > remains very incomplete. > > > > Yep, I am aware of the issue. It was broken by OpenSSL 1.0 upload to > unstable. SSLv2 is disabled now, hence the build failure. See Debian bug > #589706 [1]. The package was building fine in unstable just few days > ago. I will prepare a new package soon. > [...] Ok, as it has been uploaded already and you are aware of that problem that's ok then. Thanks a lot for your work, Michael
Attachment:
pgp5VUDz3pJkr.pgp
Description: PGP signature