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

Bug#675167: Bug#674844: Bug#674850: Bug#675167: Bug#674850: RM: figlet -- RoQA; license which "specifically excludes the right to re-distribute"

tags 675167 - moreinfo
retitle 675167 pu: package figlet/2.2.2-1+squeeze1
user release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
usertags 675167 = pu

On Sat, 2012-06-16 at 02:41 +0100, Jonathan McCrohan wrote:
> On 15/06/12 22:10, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> > So for stable, just the license information would need to get
> > updated, AIUI.
> Attached is a debdiff with backported versions of fonts/8859-* from
> figlet 2.2.5. I proposed something similar on #-release last week too.
> While I got replies from the release team, I don't think I got any
> response from a SRM.

Aside from the question of whether the content can actually have
authorship asserted over it in the first place, we've historically
treated licensing issues in stable where the situation has subsequently
been clarified in unstable as documentation updates which don't qualify
for an update in stable on their own.

Particularly as the package in stable is in non-free I'm afraid I'm not
currently convinced that the proposed changes should be applied in



Reply to: