[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#747192: RFS: foomatic-filters/4.0.17-3 ITA



Control: tag -1 + moreinfo

On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 2:18 AM, Jörg Frings-Fürst
<debian@jff-webhosting.net> wrote:
> Package: sponsorship-requests
> Severity: normal
>
>
> Dear mentors,
>
>   I am looking for a sponsor for my package "foomatic-filters"
>
>  * Package name    : foomatic-filters
>    Version         : 4.0.17-3
>    Upstream Author : Till Kamppeter <till.kamppeter@gmail.com>
>  * URL             : http://www.openprinting.org/
>  * License         : GPL-2.0+
>    Section         : text
>
>   It builds those binary packages:
>
>     foomatic-filters - OpenPrinting printer support - filters
>
>   To access further information about this package, please visit the
> following URL:
>
>   http://mentors.debian.net/package/foomatic-filters
>
>
>   Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this
> command:
>
>     dget -x
> http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/f/foomatic-filters/foomatic-filters_4.0.17-3.dsc
>
>   More information about hello can be obtained from
> http://www.example.com.
>
>   Changes since the last upload:
>
>   * convert debian/copyright to 1.0
>   * Add upstream changelog
>   * Add patch 0001-spelling-errors.diff
>       - spelling in manpage
>       - spelling in sources
>   * Bump Standards-Version to 3.9.5
>   * New Maintainer (Closes: #746381)
>

Please take a second look at debian/copyright.

Upstream-Name: downtimed
Upstream-Contact: Janne Snabb <opensource@epipe.com>

This is obviously incorrect for foomatic-filters (presumably you were
preparing an upload for downtimed and just copied + pasted these
headers).

The various files in test/ are not GPL licensed, as you claim in
debian/copyright. Also, your GPL-2.0+ license block has a reference to
GPL 3, and I have no idea where the last paragraph in your GPL license
block comes from; that's definitely not standard for GPL.

In addition, your override_dh_installchangelogs target in d/rules is
completely redundant.

Regards,
Vincent


Reply to: