Le Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 08:37:38PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
> https://salsa.debian.org/med-team/parallel/-/blob/master/debian/patches/remove-overreaching-citation-request.patch).
Hi all,
sorry but how likely is it that we will break user scripts with this patch ?
Hi,
While I was starting to prepare a non-maintainer upload to re-introduce
the patch that removed --will-cite, I realized that the patch was
already re-introduced in version 20210822+ds-2 (see
On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 5:06 AM Sam Hartman wrote:
:
> This seems clearly within the power Debian grants individual maintainers
> to either keep the citation notice or to remove it.
I hope my stance is clear:
I want to have an income from developing free software. The citation
notice indirectly
On 11/09/21 at 21:47 +0200, Ole Tange wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 7, 2021 at 11:06 AM Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> :
> > (1) the wording almost requires citation
>
> I take this as you agree that it does not require citation.
[...]
> > With a wrong eye, one could even see it as extortion/blackmail.
>
>
> "Ole" == Ole Tange writes:
Ole> On Tue, Sep 7, 2021 at 11:06 AM Lucas Nussbaum
wrote:
Ole> :
>> (1) the wording almost requires citation
Ole> I take this as you agree that it does not require
Ole> citation. Also you do not point to how the default behaviour of
On Tue, Sep 7, 2021 at 11:06 AM Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
:
> (1) the wording almost requires citation
I take this as you agree that it does not require citation. Also you
do not point to how the default behaviour of the current version of
GNU Parallel conflicts with Debian's standards. If you
On 03/09/21 at 08:04 -0700, Felix Lechner wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 7:50 AM Tobias Frost wrote:
> >
> > But as said earlier: This is not a license issue; the license of GNU
> > parallel
> > would allow removal, but this would make upstream sad.
> > The status quo is likely to mke
On 06/09/21 at 20:56 +0200, Ole Tange wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 5:05 PM Felix Lechner
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 7:50 AM Tobias Frost wrote:
> > >
> > > But as said earlier: This is not a license issue; the license of GNU
> > > parallel
> > > would allow removal, but this would
On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 5:05 PM Felix Lechner wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 7:50 AM Tobias Frost wrote:
> >
> > But as said earlier: This is not a license issue; the license of GNU
> > parallel
> > would allow removal, but this would make upstream sad.
> > The status quo is likely to mke our
Hi,
On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 7:50 AM Tobias Frost wrote:
>
> But as said earlier: This is not a license issue; the license of GNU parallel
> would allow removal, but this would make upstream sad.
> The status quo is likely to mke our users sad, though.
Maybe the debconf system can provide a
On Fri, Sep 03, 2021 at 08:44:49AM -0600, Sam Hartman wrote:
> > "Tobias" == Tobias Frost writes:
>
> Tobias> as explained earlier: click-wraps are no-no's.
> By this dxo you mean
>
> 1) clip wraps are incompatible with the DFSG? (I agree only if
> something in the license prevents you
> "Tobias" == Tobias Frost writes:
Tobias> as explained earlier: click-wraps are no-no's.
By this dxo you mean
1) clip wraps are incompatible with the DFSG? (I agree only if
something in the license prevents you from removing them)
2) Click wraps are a no-go in something you maintain?
On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 8:26 AM Andreas Tille wrote:
>
> since this issue becomes complex I'd like to bring up it at debian-legal
> list for advise.
In disagreements it often helps to first agree on what the parties
disagree on. That way you can put aside the parts you agree on. Maybe
this can
On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 07:22:52PM +0200, Ole Tange wrote:
> To me it would feel similar to a dialog box, where you have to click
> "Don't show this again" to continue the first time. This is not that
> uncommon in graphical tools, so there is some precedence for this.
as explained earlier:
On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 07:22:52PM +0200, Ole Tange wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 3:38 PM Andreas Tille wrote:
> :
> > I admit I also considered a wrapper but with a different functionality:
> > Simply check whether --citation was used before and if not do so.
>
> If you mean a wrapper
On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 3:38 PM Andreas Tille wrote:
:
> I admit I also considered a wrapper but with a different functionality:
> Simply check whether --citation was used before and if not do so.
If you mean a wrapper similar to this, then that would be a compromise
I can live with:
if [ -t 2
On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 06:18:20AM -0700, Felix Lechner wrote:
>
> Can we ship GNU Parallel with a small wrapper that removes the notice?
> Being text-based, it would not modify the software at all. I am
> thinking about something like:
>
> $ echo 'NOTICE: Wanted output.' | perl -pe '{
Hi,
> On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 08:08:26AM +0200, Ole Tange wrote:
> >
> > If you want to remove the citation notice ...
> > nothing else gives you the right to change it.
Can we ship GNU Parallel with a small wrapper that removes the notice?
Being text-based, it would not modify the software at
Hi Andreas,
On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 08:25:29AM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Hi,
>
> since this issue becomes complex I'd like to bring up it at debian-legal
> list for advise.
>
> Kind regards
>
> Andreas.
>
(usual disclaimer: IANAL. This below is only are few cents and thought on the
Hi,
since this issue becomes complex I'd like to bring up it at debian-legal
list for advise.
Kind regards
Andreas.
On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 08:08:26AM +0200, Ole Tange wrote:
> Ian Turner wrote:
> > On 8/28/21 7:41 AM, Andreas Tille wrote:
> >>I updated the patch in Git[1] but did not
Ian Turner wrote:
> On 8/28/21 7:41 AM, Andreas Tille wrote:
>>I updated the patch in Git[1] but did not yet activate it yet. I'm fine
>>with uploading parallel with the patch activated if you really think we
>>should disrespect the wish of the author and insist on plain GPL text.
>
> My reading
Good day,
Andreas Tille, on 2021-08-28:
> Thanks for the patch. I'll upload this soon.
I noticed a CITATIONS file at the root of the source code, which
might contain information suitable for debian/upstream/metadata.
I suppose it would be fair to reference Ole's work appropriately
as we do for
On Sat, Aug 28, 2021 at 10:00:12PM +0200, Étienne Mollier wrote:
> Andreas Tille, on 2021-08-28:
> > Thanks for the patch. I'll upload this soon.
>
> I noticed a CITATIONS file at the root of the source code, which
> might contain information suitable for debian/upstream/metadata.
> I suppose it
Thanks for the patch. I'll upload this soon.
On Sat, Aug 28, 2021 at 01:48:56PM -0400, Ian Turner wrote:
> Thanks Andreas.
>
> On 8/28/21 12:57 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:
> > Patches are always welcome.
>
> Attached is a patch that removes all mentions of the --bibtex or --citation
> parameters,
Thanks Andreas.
On 8/28/21 12:57 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:
Patches are always welcome.
Attached is a patch that removes all mentions of the --bibtex or
--citation parameters, or demands for 1 EUR, throughout the
codebase. It includes the patch you already committed, so it should
serve
On Sat, Aug 28, 2021 at 12:08:56PM -0400, Ian Turner wrote:
> My reading of bug 905674 is that the citation notice has been previously
> judged to be incompatible with the DFSG and that's why it was removed.
>
> Also ultimately Debian developers will have to make their own decision,
> though if
On 8/28/21 7:41 AM, Andreas Tille wrote:
I updated the patch in Git[1] but did not yet activate it yet. I'm fine
with uploading parallel with the patch activated if you really think we
should disrespect the wish of the author and insist on plain GPL text.
My reading of bug 905674 is that the
On Fri, Aug 27, 2021 at 06:47:51PM -0400, Ian Turner wrote:
> Hi Andreas and other maintainers,
>
> It appears that upload 20210322+ds-1 for package parallel reverts the change
> made in NMU upload 20161222-1.1. Is that intentional?
I admit it is not intentional and was rather a regression.
Hi Andreas and other maintainers,
It appears that upload 20210322+ds-1 for package parallel reverts the
change made in NMU upload 20161222-1.1. Is that intentional?
Ian Turner
29 matches
Mail list logo
