Re: RFS: xxxterm
Hi,
On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 10:26:24AM +0200, Benoît Knecht wrote:
> Hi Luis,
>
> Luis Henriques wrote:
> > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "xxxterm".
> >
> > * Package name : xxxterm
> > Version : 1.471-1
> > Upstream Author : Several (Marco Peereboom <marco@peereboom.us>)
> > * URL : http://opensource.conformal.com/wiki/XXXTerm
> > * License : ISC, MIT, BSD-4-clause, BSD-3-clause, BSD-2-clause, CC-BY-SA
> > Section : web
>
> I know it's been uploaded already, but I just had a small comment about
> your debian/copyright file, so here it is:
Thank a lot for your review. Your comments make, obviously, perfect sense
and I will take them into consideration to create the next package.
I have however a few comments below.
> - Since some licenses (like ISC) are used several times, I guess it
> would be more readable to use standalone license paragraphs.
>
> - You have a line that reads
>
> Files: marco.c, js-merge-helper.pl
>
> but it should be a white space separated list (no comma).
>
> - In the paragraph for linux/linux.c, you have several License fields;
> that's not allowed. You have to use 'and' or 'or' keywords between
> the license short names in the first line (in this case, 'and').
>
> - Regarding the png logos, I don't know where you got the license
> information from, but you didn't write which version of the cc-by-sa
> applies. Also, I'm not entirely sure this image is actually free;
> the exact same fight club soap can be seen here [1]. Of course, it
> may be that it's that website that is in violation of the cc-by-sa
> by not mentioning the license, but it would be nice to know where
> the image comes from originally.
>
> [1] http://uncrate.com/stuff/fight-club-soap/
I got the license information for the png files from the upstream authors.
I asked them privately (there is no mailing list, only a web forum) and
their reply was "creative commons".
But I do understand your concern about this. I can try to ping again the
authors to get more details about this. However, if I'm not able to sort
this out, would you recommend to remove these files from the package? I
guess they could be easily replaced with other generic webbrowser logos
already available in Debian...
> - Some files are not listed at all, like xxxterm.conf or everything
> under freebsd/.
With respect to the xxxterm.conf (and other example configurations), there
is no explicit reference to a license. Again, the authors referred to the
website (http://opensource.conformal.com/wiki/XXXTerm#License), where I
can assume it is ISC. Thus, I can add these files to the debian/copyright
with this license.
With respect to the freebsd/ directory files, I admit I add some doubts
about including them or not in debian/copyright. I took a look at other
similar packages (i.e., with files specific to other OSes that are not
used for building Debian packages) and these files were not referred.
Maybe I should have asked someone instead... :-)
So, in order to be consistent, I could included them on the copyright
file and open a bug report against the package(s) that have the same
issue. What do you think?
Cheers,
--
Luis Henriques
Reply to: