Raphael Geissert wrote: > Hi all, > > I've just implemented another check, this time for the copyright file > which basically tries to detect the ones that don't provide "any" licence > information at all. > > I've tried to make it as less prone to FPs as possible and even ran > lintian on over 16410 packages which are either available at sarge, etch, > testing, unstable, or experimental and reviewed some of the packages for > which the tag was emitted and so far have not found any false positive > [1]. > > [1] There are some packages that just quote a file found on the orig > [tarball > like (but please note that it is all what they say): > "you may copy, modify, and redistribute freely." - evolver_2.30c-1 > And there are some gitwares around being matched too: flying, > allegro-demo, allegro-demo-data, allegro-examples. > > I'm proposing a Severity: serious as I believe most, if not all, of those > packages have issues that need to be resolved/clarified before they keep > being distributed. > > I'm CC'ing ftpmaster to let them speak up now and make them aware of this > new tag that, when added, could be useful to them for NEW and getting some > packages already in the archive out. > > Anyway, the proposed check is attached as a mbox for git-am. > > PS. as long as a copy of the message is sent to lintian's ML I will read > it, so please don't send me a copy on those cases.
Ping. > > Cheers, Cheers, -- Atomo64 - Raphael Please avoid sending me Word, PowerPoint or Excel attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
