Re: Difference between license in files and in COPYING file

2010-02-14 Thread Joachim Wiedorn
Hello, Ben Finney ben+deb...@benfinney.id.au wrote: No, it violates DFSG §3. If the package violates DFSG, so it should be moved to non-free archive. Because the package d4x does not have an maintainer (it is orphaned again) Who can do this? Should it do the QA group? Or can it be an NMU? I

Re: Difference between license in files and in COPYING file

2010-02-14 Thread Joachim Wiedorn
Hello, Christofer C. Bell christofer.c.b...@gmail.com wrote: ie; Not even a Debian Maintainer can modify the software to package it. So this software looks like a non-starter for inclusion in Debian, even in non-free. So what is the right way? Who can / must decide this? If non-free is not

Re: Difference between license in files and in COPYING file

2010-02-14 Thread Charles Plessy
Le Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 11:18:57PM +0100, Joachim Wiedorn a écrit : /*WebDownloader for X-Window * *Copyright (C) 1999-2002 Koshelev Maxim *This Program is free but not GPL!!! You can't modify it *without agreement with author. You can't distribute modified *

Re: Difference between license in files and in COPYING file

2010-02-13 Thread Joachim Wiedorn
Hello, Ben Finney ben+deb...@benfinney.id.au wrote: No, it violates DFSG §3. So I can do nothing. Today I have tried to contact the old developer = author with his old email adress, but I think I get no answer. Thank you for this effort, it is necessary to try. Today I have received his

Re: Difference between license in files and in COPYING file

2010-02-13 Thread Ben Finney
Joachim Wiedorn ad_deb...@joonet.de writes: So there is only on step to do: Move d4x into the non-free archive. Take care: The fact that a work is non-free does not mean the Debian project has license to redistribute it in the ‘non-free’ section. Many works are so non-free that they cannot be

Re: Difference between license in files and in COPYING file

2010-02-13 Thread Christofer C. Bell
On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 6:31 PM, Ben Finney ben+deb...@benfinney.id.auben%2bdeb...@benfinney.id.au wrote: Joachim Wiedorn ad_deb...@joonet.de writes: So there is only on step to do: Move d4x into the non-free archive. Take care: The fact that a work is non-free does not mean the Debian

Difference between license in files and in COPYING file

2010-02-12 Thread Joachim Wiedorn
Hello, I want to overtake the package d4x, which is still in Debian repository. And this package need some development (upstream), which I could do, too. The old developer = author have deleted the hole package website and nobody have heard of him for a long time ( 4 years I mean). But now I

Re: Difference between license in files and in COPYING file

2010-02-12 Thread Francesco Poli
On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 23:18:57 +0100 Joachim Wiedorn wrote: Hello, Hi! I want to overtake the package d4x, [...] But now I have seen, that this package is not fully licensed under the Artistic license 1.0 (as everybody would thought), but each source file have the following header:

Re: Difference between license in files and in COPYING file

2010-02-12 Thread Ben Finney
Joachim Wiedorn ad_deb...@joonet.de writes: The old developer = author have deleted the hole package website and nobody have heard of him for a long time ( 4 years I mean). That does make it rather more difficult; the copyright regime we live under means that, regardless of the fact no-one has