Hi Luis, I think you misunderstood my comments. I will try be clear: you can't add an imaginary license. So, remove the imaginary licenses from d/copyright and I will can upload your package. Thus, the files as png and xpm will use the same license of the whole package.
Thanks, Eriberto 2014-08-18 17:55 GMT-03:00 Luis Henriques <hen...@camandro.org>: > On Sun, Aug 17, 2014 at 06:58:15PM -0300, Eriberto wrote: >> 2014-08-17 17:27 GMT-03:00 Luis Henriques <hen...@camandro.org>: >> > Hi Eriberto, >> >> >> Hi!!! >> >> >> > On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 08:32:55PM -0300, Eriberto wrote: >> >> Hi Luis, >> >> >> >> Sorry for my delay and congratulations for your work. I agree with >> >> your considerations. >> > >> > Again, thanks a *lot* for reviewing my xombrero package! >> >> >> You are welcome. :-) >> >> >> >> > For example, in your example above, I would interpret it as having file >> > 'xombrero.css' copyrighted by all those authors, even if the real copyright >> > owner is only Josh Rickmar; the same is true for the xombrero.1 file: the >> > only copyright owners are Marco Peereboom, Jason McIntyre and Josh >> > Rickmar. >> > >> > My debian/copyright contains more detailed information, that allows to >> > know exactly who owns the copyright for each file individually. Of course >> > I do group some of the files, but the copyrights are so different between >> > different files that I decided not to use the 'Files: *' pattern (although >> > I use the 'Files: debian/*' pattern). >> >> >> If you and I write a book, our names will be put on the cover without >> a distinction. So, when three people write a program, all are >> upstreams. So, is uncommon separate the upstreams. A split in several >> paragraphs will make the maintaining of this package hard. I can >> upload your package. However, I never saw it and, maybe, the >> FTP-Master can reject. (your package will be NEW because it doesn't >> exist on Debian) >> >> Please, read these itens: >> >> 1. Item Copyright in >> https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/#fields >> >> 2. Example 4 in >> https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/#fields >> >> A conclusion: I understand your idea but it is no usual. >> >> > > Ok, got it and I'm convinced :-) Thanks for your patience. > >> > Anyway, I'm OK following the approach you're suggesting -- I just want to >> > confirm that my understanding is correct and this is exactly what you want >> > me to do. >> > >> > <snip> >> > >> >> >> >> I have two doubts: >> >> >> >> Where you saw that the files style.css, *.png, tordisabled.ico and >> >> torenabled.ico are using the CC-BY-SA license? >> >> >> > >> > The license for the style.css is mentioned in the xombrero website >> > (https://opensource.conformal.com/wiki/xombrero). >> >> Ok. It is a common problem with CC, GPL and others. From CC site[1]: >> >> "You must include a copy of, or the Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) >> for, this License with every copy of the Work You Distribute or >> Publicly Perform." >> >> So, the license needs to be put inside the tarball. If not, you can't >> refer to this license and, consequently, the png will use the same >> license of the main source code. >> > > OK, that makes sense perfect. > > Unfortunately, I'm afraid I can't afford spending any more time with the > xombrero package at the moment. And having to deal with upstream to fix > this particular issue isn't something particularly interesting (it hasn't > been particularly... "pleasant" to deal with the xombrero developers in the > past ;-) ). > > Anyway, if someone else volunteers to fix the remaining issues with the > xombrero package, I'm more than happy to share what I've at the moment. > > Again, thanks a lot for your reviews Eriberto! > > Cheers, > -- > Luis > > >> [1] http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/legalcode >> >> > >> > Regarding the tor icons, they are reused from the tor project and the >> > terms and license we're taken from the project website >> > (https://www.torproject.org/). >> >> >> The same problem. The upstream failed when reused a code and didn't >> describe the original license and credits (copyright notice). >> Consequently: he can be prosecuted and you can't put a not explicit >> license in d/copyright. >> >> >> > Finally, the *png files licenses were confirmed in private emails with the >> > xombrero project developers (iirc, when I first packaged xxxterm there was >> > not public mailing list yet). >> >> >> Can you guess what I will say you? >> >> >> >> Where you found *.xpm files? >> >> >> > >> > Ah, this one is generated my me in debian/rules from the xpm files. >> >> >> >> Ah, ok. They are derivated from *.png. The same problem with the license. >> >> Feel free to ask me about my explanation and thaks for your work and >> interest. >> >> Cheers, >> >> Eriberto > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org > Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140818205528.ga15...@achilles.my.domain > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org