Eriberto Mota writes (Re: Upstream GPL-3+ vs debian/* GPL-2+):
Now, I would like to understand why the packaging isn't a derivative
work (when haven't a patch). So, I am thinking that is because Debian
distributes, separately, the upstream code (orig.tar.gz) and
debian.tar.xz
Thanks all for explanations. This question is clear to me now.
Regards,
Eriberto
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
Charles and Ian, thanks for explanations.
Now, I would like to understand why the packaging isn't a derivative
work (when haven't a patch). So, I am thinking that is because Debian
distributes, separately, the upstream code (orig.tar.gz) and
debian.tar.xz. Is this? But, the .deb is a product of
On 22/08/14 14:25, Eriberto Mota wrote:
So, I am thinking that is because Debian
distributes, separately, the upstream code (orig.tar.gz) and
debian.tar.xz. Is this? But, the .deb is a product of the junction of
these files. So, I am confused. Can you clarify me this issue?
The key thing here
Eriberto Mota eribe...@debian.org writes:
Now, I would like to understand why the packaging isn't a derivative
work (when haven't a patch).
The term “derived work” or “derivative work” is a term of art from
copyright law. The determination of whether one work is, in this sense,
derived from
2014-08-19 18:44 GMT-03:00 Charles Plessy ple...@debian.org:
if your packaging work contains copyrightable parts (note that some typical
files in debian directories are definitely trivial and therefore
non-copyrightable), then their license need to be compatible with the upstream
sources if
Thanks a lot for your reply Charles. But I am a bit confuse... Is the
debian/ a derivative work from upstream code? If yes, must be the
license GPL-3+ or not?
No, it is not a derivative work. (Except for debian/patches/ if you
use that, but that's presumably not what you mean.)
I didn't
Le Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 05:43:09PM +0100, Ian Jackson a écrit :
Thanks a lot for your reply Charles. But I am a bit confuse... Is the
debian/ a derivative work from upstream code? If yes, must be the
license GPL-3+ or not?
No, it is not a derivative work. (Except for debian/patches/ if
Charles Plessy writes (Re: Upstream GPL-3+ vs debian/* GPL-2+):
Note that the importance is compatibility. You can definitely chose
a more permissive license, like CC0, MIT, etc. if you wish so.
I think that best practice is to choose a very permissive licence for
the Debian packaging files
Hi,
I have a doubt about a situation.
The upstream source code is GPL3+. Packaging is a derivative work and
I think that it must be GPL. So, GPL-3+, right? Or can the debian/* be
GPL-2+?
From FSF site[1]:
-
Is GPLv3 compatible with GPLv2?
No. Some of the requirements in GPLv3,
Le Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 11:15:46AM -0300, Eriberto Mota a écrit :
I have a doubt about a situation.
The upstream source code is GPL3+. Packaging is a derivative work and
I think that it must be GPL. So, GPL-3+, right? Or can the debian/* be
GPL-2+?
Dear Eriberto,
if your packaging work
11 matches
Mail list logo
