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

Bug#882568: RFS: nq/0.2.1-1 [ITP]



 ❦ 24 novembre 2017 21:25 +0100, Nicolas Braud-Santoni <nicolas@braud-santoni.eu> :

>> Any MBF should be discussed first on debian-devel@ first. For me,
>> this seems a small violation and it would be preferable to stick with
>> severity normal to not appear too agressive.
>
> Only 8 source packages are concerned (re: not shipping the CC0 text),
> so I didn't realise that constituted a MBF.
>
> Thanks for the advise on the severity, I was under the impression that all
> policy violations should be `serious` or greater.  How should I
> proceed?

For 8 packages, you can file the bug directly. As for severity, people
may not agree with the interpretation of the policy: CC0 is equivalent
to public domain and the license text is very verbose. It would be
easier to push the change without a "threatening" severity.

>> > Thanks a bunch for the review,
>> 
>> Looks good. Tell me what you want to do about the remaining lintian
>> warning.
>
> If that's fine by you, I would rather have it uploaded as-is.

So, it's uploaded.
-- 
Debian package sponsoring guidelines:
 https://vincent.bernat.im/en/debian-package-sponsoring

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: