Re: RFS: phing (Another try)

[Benoît Knecht <benoit.knecht@fsfe.org>]

Nicolas wrote:
> >  - debian/phing.1 still contains the BUGS section I mentioned
> >    previously.
> >
> > I used Arno advice and add twice reporting system, debian on and upstream
> one.
> 
> 
> >  - Your debian/copyright file is still not DEP-5 compliant. To repeat
> >    what I said before, it "doesn't use a versioned Format URL; in the
> >     latest version of DEP-5, the Name and Maintainer fields do not
> >    exist."
> >
> > I forgot to remove Name. Do you think I must add a revision to the format
> specification ?

Yes you should use a versioned URL. The current one is [1].

[1] http://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/dep/web/deps/dep5.mdwn?view=markup&pathrev=174

> >     Instead of repeating the LGPL-3 twice, you should put it in a
> >    stand-alone license paragraph.
> >
> 
> The copyright is not the same so I repeated twice.

The copyright is different, but the license is the same. I'm not saying
you shouldn't have two separate Files paragraphs, I'm just saying that
each of these paragraphs should have a one-line License field, and then
at the end of the document, you should have a stand-alone License
paragraph for the LGPL-3.

> >    "All rights reserved" is not a license. I've checked the fist two
> >    files you list under that license, they seem to be LGPL. Don't
> >    include "@copyright" in the Copyright field.
> >
> 
> O I remove!
> 
> >
> >    You need a stand-alone license paragraph for the Apache and Expat
> >    licenses.
> >
> > Same as LGPL, the copyright is not the same.

Again, you must include the text of the license in a stand-alone License
paragraph.

Cheers,

-- 
Benoît Knecht