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

Bug#795482: marked as done (qtbase-opensource-src: Non-free code possibly in torrent example)

Your message dated Wed, 30 Dec 2015 10:18:39 +0300
with message-id <145145991985.10689.15534246718489015389@mitya57.me>
and subject line Re: Bug#795482: Moreinfo
has caused the Debian Bug report #795482,
regarding qtbase-opensource-src: Non-free code possibly in torrent example
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
795482: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=795482
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Source: qtbase-opensource-src
Version: 5.5.0+dfsg-3
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 4.5

During New review I ran across this:

O: qtbase-opensource-src source: license-problem-non-free-RFC examples/network/doc/src/torrent.qdoc

I looked and that file indeed has the non-free licensing terms.  It isn't
clear (and I didn't investigate) the degree to which those terms apply to
any code in examples/network/torrent/, but this needs investigation as
code that it applies to is non-free.

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
Version: 5.6.0~beta+dfsg-1

On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 10:17:25 -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> I don't see any reason to believe that code is non-free.  I think the approach
> taken in https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/123431/ to resolve this
> ambiguity is the right one.

And that change was applied in Qt 5.6 beta, so closing this bug.

--
Dmitry Shachnev

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


--- End Message ---
Reply to: