Please clarify the intented license of example file in basilisk
Hi Aaron,
the Debian R packaging team intends to package basilisk for Debian. In
Debian the ftpmaster team has the role to verify licenses and copyright
of new software. The team member who was checking my upload considers
the files in
inst/example/inst/test_dummy
as differently licensed than the whole basilisk package and wants me
to mention it as licensed under the MIT license[1]. I personally
disagree since I consider this a simple example string inside a code
snippet but ftpmaster rejected even a second time with the words:
"upstream decided that this test package should have a different
license than the rest of his software and said so in the
corresponding setup.py"[2].
The statement of FTPMaster is based on line 9 of a 12 line of code
example file[3]. It contains the string "license='MIT'" while all other
code of the package is GPL-3.
It would be great if you could explicitly express your intention to
stop wild guessing whether it is a license statement or an example
string.
Thanks a lot and sorry for stealing your time with this kind of
questions
Andreas.
[1] https://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/r-pkg-team/2022-February/024165.html
[2] https://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/r-pkg-team/2022-February/024248.html
[3] https://salsa.debian.org/r-pkg-team/r-bioc-basilisk/-/blob/master/inst/example/inst/test_dummy/setup.py#L9
--
http://fam-tille.de
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: