Btw: Is there a way to make the non-free models available as a
separate package in the non-free archive perhaps once in the future?
Ruben
2015-02-21 20:11 GMT+01:00 Ruben Undheim <ruben.undheim@gmail.com>:
> Hi José L,
>
> Thanks for giving detailed information!
>
> This explains it very well.
>
> Getting the licenses ok isn't always the easiest thing to do...
>
> I wish you good luck and I hope that we once again will see Qucs in the archive.
>
> Thanks a lot for the effort!
>
> Best regards,
> Ruben
>
>
> 2015-02-21 19:28 GMT+01:00 José Luis Redrejo Rodríguez <jredrejo@debian.org>:
>>
>>
>> 2015-02-21 12:46 GMT+01:00 Ruben Undheim <ruben.undheim@gmail.com>:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> > I've just uploaded it to the archive
>>>
>>> I just saw this was written in October. As far as I can see, Qucs is
>>> not available in the Debian repository now. Is there anything holding
>>> it up?
>>
>>
>>
>> Yes, the sources contain some files which license is not acceptable by
>> Debian ftpmaster, so it has been rejected.
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Which archive did you upload it too?
>>>
>>> I can see that there is a well maintained PPA for Ubuntu with packages
>>> in good state here:
>>> https://launchpad.net/~fransschreuder1/+archive/ubuntu/qucs
>>>
>>> Is there any reason why this package cannot enter Debian sid also
>>> soon. I'm impressed of how well Qucs has become.
>>
>>
>>
>> Yes, it is not a pure technical question. The package was ready, working and
>> lintian clean.
>> It 's a licensing problem. There are a bunch of files (mainly models) with
>> non-free licenses. I'm trying to clean them all, but qucs funcionality are
>> being reduced.
>> I'm trying to find a replacement to keep it all working.
>> Of course, the ppa package you say it's still worse in terms of licensing. I
>> had already removed the files I was sure that were not free, but ftpmasters
>> found some others.
>>
>> Regards
>> José L.
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Ruben
>>
>>