Hi, Am Sonntag, den 18.01.2015, 14:49 +0100 schrieb Christian Kastner: > Perhaps I misunderstood something, but to be clear: some files are > distributed under the GPL, and some under a BSD license. The combination > thereof doesn't change this, there is no dual-licensing or > license-mixing here.
Well, that’s how the files are distributed to Debian. But that doesn’t
mean that Debian cannot re-license them all under the GPL... At least I
thought that BSD code can generally be relicensed under the GPL.
> To emphasize this, I would
>
> * add a new Files: section for the BSD sha2.{c,h} files, and
>
> * either create a new Files: section for SHA256.hs, or
>
> * merge it with the Files: *, if the referred GPL version is
> determined to be the same.
Patches welcome. My personal motivation to spend a significant amount of
time with copy’n’paste is low.
(Maybe I should just stay quiet and hope someone else takes care of it.)
Greetings,
Joachim
--
Joachim "nomeata" Breitner
Debian Developer
nome...@debian.org | ICQ# 74513189 | GPG-Keyid: F0FBF51F
JID: nome...@joachim-breitner.de | http://people.debian.org/~nomeata
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
