Quoting moul@moul.re (2020-09-21 19:28:53) > How are you doing with the packaging? > What steps have been done? What's left on your list? > > I released a v0.58.0 which would be the last one with Python 3.5 > support. > I am planning a v0.60.0 which drops Python 3.5 and uses Scrypt from > v3.6 standard library. For Debian there is no need to support Python 3.5 - oldest release officially supported by Debian is currently stable (a.k.a. buster) which has Python 3.7: https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/python3-defaults > Regarding DuniterPy v0.60.0, is there any requirement or wish from > your side for the packaging, for us to include it into this release? DuniterPy is still waiting for Debian ftpmaster approval in the so-called "NEW queue": https://ftp-master.debian.org/new/python-duniterpy_0.57.0-1.html While the package is in NEW queue I do not get automatically notified about new releases, and it is helpful if you drop me an email when new releases are issued. > One thing that we need to clarify on our side is about the copyright > and license statements usage in the headers of every files. > In our discussion for Silkaj packaging for Debian Buster, you told me > that this how the GPL licensing should be used. > For our understanding, is it a requirement from Debian packaging or > from the GPL licensing guidelines? One answer can be that Debian > packaging requires to follow the licenses guidelines. It is not _required_ to state licensing in every file. It is only _recommended_ to do so. > The runtime source code should have them of course. Does the tests and > the examples should also have those statements? Ideally, every file that is protected by copyright contains both copyright and license statement. Legally there is *no* need to write anything at all. Copyright is implicitly assigned! The sentence "All right reserved" is archaic. The purpose of those statements is to _help_ your users to a) know what they are allowed to do without needing to ask the copyright holders, and b) know who are the copyright holders in case they want to ask for additional permissions. If you don't see it as a good thing to help your users know their rights, then maybe you should ask yourself why you are licensing your code as Free software at all! If in doubt, I recommend to add copyright and license statements: It is not harmful, and it is potentially helpful. > Does the tests and the examples will be distributed in the package? Debian distributes both source and binary code. Tests are typically distributed only as part of the source package. Examples are typically distributed with both source and binary packages. Kind regards, - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: signature