Cédric Boutillier escreveu isso aí: > Just a short question, while I am at it: blankslate.rb is extracted from > Builder, released under the MIT(Expat) license. The blankslate project > does not mention any license explicitely, expect the header of > blankslate.rb: > All right reserved. > . > Permission is granted for use, copying, modification, distribution, > and distribution of modified versions of this work as long as the above > copyright notice is included. > Should I consider the license as being this paragraph, or as being MIT? I guess the intentation was to keep the license, but unless that license is replicated in the new package, all we can assume is what's written in the blankslate.rb header. You should probably ask upstream to add a proper license statement to the blankslate package. -- Antonio Terceiro <terceiro@debian.org>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature