Re: Camomile legal case
On Tue, May 11, 2004 at 09:07:04AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Tue, May 11, 2004 at 12:18:29AM +0200, Sylvain LE GALL wrote:
> > ps : last thread on -legal
> > http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2003/07/msg00056.html
>
> Looking at this thread there's not a real consensus on whether or not
> that file is free, but IMO is 'enough-consensus' to upload the package
> in main. As I read indeed there are a lot other packages in main
> shipping this file ...
>
> Anyway many posts refers to the next release of miscfile package which
> will contain a copy of that file certainly free. Has this release
> happened and does he ship the file? It this is the case, using that
> would be certainly better.
Hello,
Well, i contact upstream and package maintainer of miscfile, i also
propose to upstream of camomile ( who is surely reading this mail ), to
try to use it...
Upstream of camomile seems ok to use it if and only if it has the same
encoding/characters et al ( he propose a test suite to check this ).
( correct me if i am wrong )
Concering upstream and/or packager ( it is the same guy ) of msicfiles,
i contact him and he reply that he has give packaging/maintaining of the
the file to another people ( as far as i can remember ). I am waiting
for a release ( the current one is more old than the one in camomile --
i mean really older ).
If i can use this file in place, i will propose to the upstream of
camomile a patch to use it...
Concerning future release of camomile, i think a upload should be OK
because perl, unidata, python et al use the same file ( but i cannot
build depends on other package source, so i cannot get this file ).
I will prepare a 0.5.0 package for next week.
Thanks
Kind regard
Sylvain Le Gall
Reply to: