Re: fbpdf license doubt
> First, it have no LICESNSE file, only main source file mention
> modified BSD. I twice mailed author, but seems that he ignored my
> request to add full-fledged LICENSE file. Second is that it do not
> make releases. And third, pure technical problem is that package
> provides binaries `fbpdf` and `fbpdf2`, functionally identical, but
> having different dependencies. I am not sure what to do with it.
Hmm... "modified BSD license" typically means the 3-clause BSD license:
https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/License:BSD_3Clause
It would be better if the author had put a LICENSE file, but it doesn't
seem like including it in the archive would do any harm.
Not making releases isn't important; many packages in Debian don't.
Since it's maintained in git, you can just use the git revision number
(checksum) as the version.
Having two binaries is weird, but it doesn't mean that fbpdf shouldn't
be included in Debian.
Reply to: