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

Bug#819395: RFS: stormlib-listfiles/2015-04-20-1 [ITP]



Hi! Now after month, any news regarding this package?

On Wednesday 27 April 2016 12:53:06 Gianfranco Costamagna wrote:
> Hi Pali and mentors,
> 
> (redirecting the question to -mentors, because I don't have a strong opinion on this)
> 
> 
> >Looks like we do not have exact license text as those file "were
> >generated" by brute-force methods by more people and put into public
> >domain. People names (or nick names) are already included in copyright
> >file. That is all what I know and cannot do more. If there are or there
> >are not law problems it is probably question for other people...
> 
> there should be a verbatim copy of the license included in the upstream tarball
> 
> look e.g. to 
> 
> https://ftp-master.debian.org/REJECT-FAQ.html
> License II and III sections
> 
> 
> so, either you have to document how the license is obtained, or how to reproduce the files
> generation.
> 
> I know licenses are a waste of time for somebody (they were for me when I started
> my contributions in Debian :p )...
> but they are the best way to get your package rejected by ftpmasters!
> 
> So, this point is really a showstopper for the inclusion in Debian of the tool
> (BTW if you want to ask ftpmasters about their opinion let me know their answer).
> 
> I would like to avoid uploading and get a reject, but I would consider an
> upload with a ping to ftpmasters about this issue.
> 
> cheers,
> 
> Gianfranco
> 
> 
> Il Martedì 26 Aprile 2016 23:07, Pali Rohár <pali.rohar@gmail.com> ha scritto:
> On Thursday 21 April 2016 10:16:29 Pali Rohár wrote:
> > On Tuesday 19 April 2016 08:36:49 Gianfranco Costamagna wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > >There is no more info about it just as it is public domain, no
> > > >more license texts... What to write into paragraph then??
> > > 
> > > everything is a license, and public domain is a license too.
> > > https://codesearch.debian.net/results/License:%20public-domain/page
> > > _0
> > > 
> > > G.
> > 
> > Looks like we do not have exact license text as those file "were
> > generated" by brute-force methods by more people and put into public
> > domain. People names (or nick names) are already included in
> > copyright file. That is all what I know and cannot do more. If there
> > are or there are not law problems it is probably question for other
> > people...
> 
> Gianfranco, what else needs to be done? I think I done everything what I 
> was able to do...
> 
> 

-- 
Pali Rohár
pali.rohar@gmail.com


Reply to: