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

Bug#841637: marked as done (ITP: lockss-daemon -- Daemon for LOCKSS digital preservation system)

Your message dated Fri, 10 Mar 2017 14:34:52 +0000
with message-id <E737F890-9B95-49F2-8A7D-1BDED3D934A0@law.harvard.edu>
and subject line re: ITP: lockss-daemon -- Daemon for LOCKSS digital preservation system
has caused the Debian Bug report #841637,
regarding ITP: lockss-daemon -- Daemon for LOCKSS digital preservation system
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.)


-- 
841637: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=841637
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Ben Steinberg <bsteinberg@law.harvard.edu>

* Package name    : lockss-daemon
  Version         : 1.70.4
  Upstream Author : The LOCKSS Program <info@lockss.org>
* URL             : https://github.com/lockss/lockss-daemon
* License         : BSD-3-Clause
  Programming Lang: Java
  Description     : Daemon for LOCKSS digital preservation system

The LOCKSS Program is a distributed digital preservation system built
on the principle that "lots of copies keep stuff safe."

See also https://www.lockss.org/about/what-is-lockss/

LOCKSS is currently distributed as an RPM and as an ISO containing a
CentOS box.
I (and others) want to deploy LOCKSS on Debian systems, and I'd rather
install a
first-class Debian package than use alien. I've been in touch with the
upstream
developers, and they're amenable.

I plan to maintain this package myself. I will need a sponsor.

The license, from 
https://github.com/lockss/lockss-daemon/blob/master/licence.md, is:

Copyright (c) 2016, Board of Trustees of Leland Stanford Jr. University,
All rights reserved.


Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are
met:

* Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
 notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.

* Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright
 notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the
 documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.

* Neither the name of Stanford University nor the names of its
 contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from
 this software without specific prior written permission.

THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND CONTRIBUTORS "AS
IS" AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED
TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A
PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COPYRIGHT
HOLDER OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL,
SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT
LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE,
DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY
THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT
(INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE
OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

LOCKSS is a trademark of Stanford University.

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
I am withdrawing this ITP and closing the bug. We've settled on using CentOS and the upstream RPM as the path of least resistance, and, after discussing this with DD Milan Kupcevic, came to understand that this would be a big bite for a first package: there are a lot of java dependencies.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail


--- End Message ---
Reply to: