Bug#817005: RFS: aseqjoy/0.0.1-1 [ITP]
El 29/04/16 a las 18:31, Adam Borowski escribió:
> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 08:45:27PM +0000, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote:
>>> Fixed. Is possible to have upstream => gpl2 and debian/* => gpl3, true?
>>
>> this means that it will be impossible to forward patches upstream without manually
>> relicensing them.
>>
>> I personally don't prefer, because only the author of each patch will be able to forward
>> it upstream.
>
> It's worse: as the package is built from sources under mutually conflicting
> licenses, it is indistributable.
>
> As both the packaging and the only patch come exclusively from you, I'd
> simply change the license for debian/* to GPL-2+ (but, see below).
>
>> licensecheck *
>> shows the license of some files as GPL-2+ not GPL-2
>
> It looks like there's a mismatch:
>
> README says:
> # Copyright 2003 by Alexander K.nig - alex@lisas.de
> # License: GPL V2 - see the file COPYING
> (COPYING is the text of GPL-2)
>
> but, aseqjoy.c says:
> # or (at your option) any later version.
>
> Too bad, while it's the only C source, there's one more copyrightable file,
> aseqjoy.1.in, which doesn't embed a license statement and thus is covered by
> the README.
>
> So unless you contact the author or rewrite the manpage, the effective
> license is GPL-2 only.
>
hi both, thanks to help me.
if i understand, if i change the debian/* to GPL-2+ will solved only the
patches issues? and still have problem with the upstream man file?
my own patch just is trivial and solve spell lintian warning only.
i just send a email to the upstream author with this comments also.
will need to release a new tarball with this changes?
Thanks.
--
Fernando Toledo
Dock Sud BBS
http://bbs.docksud.com.ar
telnet://bbs.docksud.com.ar
Reply to: