Your message dated Fri, 21 Mar 2003 10:35:45 -0600
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#182916: adding GFDL license and license manpages to
base-files
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 20 Dec 2002 04:30:32 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Dec 19 22:30:32 2002
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from 178-52.speede.golden.net (horta) [216.75.178.52] (mail)
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
id 18PEnw-0007bk-00; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 22:30:32 -0600
Received: from treacy by horta with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian))
id 18PEo8-0005HV-00
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 23:30:44 -0500
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 23:30:44 -0500
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: GNU Free Documentation License should be added to common-licenses
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i
From: "James A. Treacy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-7.2 required=5.0
tests=SIGNATURE_SHORT_DENSE,SPAM_PHRASE_00_01,USER_AGENT,
USER_AGENT_MUTT
version=2.41
X-Spam-Level:
Package: base-files
Version: 3.0.6
Severity: wishlist
As use of the GNU Free Documentation License is increasing it makes
sense to add it to the licenses in /usr/share/common-licenses.
The latest version can be retrieved from
http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.txt
--
James (Jay) Treacy
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 182916-done) by bugs.debian.org; 21 Mar 2003 16:41:15 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Mar 21 10:41:14 2003
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from host-12-107-230-171.dtccom.net (glaurung.green-gryphon.com)
[12.107.230.171]
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
id 18wPZw-0002qG-00; Fri, 21 Mar 2003 10:41:13 -0600
Received: from glaurung.green-gryphon.com ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [127.0.0.1])
by glaurung.green-gryphon.com (8.12.8/8.12.8/Debian-2) with ESMTP id
h2LGZmfW027386;
Fri, 21 Mar 2003 10:35:48 -0600
Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])
by glaurung.green-gryphon.com (8.12.8/8.12.8/Debian-2) id
h2LGZjKD027382;
Fri, 21 Mar 2003 10:35:45 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: glaurung.green-gryphon.com: srivasta set sender to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] using -f
X-Mailer: emacs 21.3.50.17 (via feedmail 8 I)
To: Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Bug#182916: adding GFDL license and license manpages to
base-files
From: Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Organization: The Debian Project
X-URL: http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/
User-Agent: Gnus/5.090017 (Oort Gnus v0.17) Emacs/21.3.50 (gnu/linux)
(i686-pc-linux-gnu)
Mail-Copies-To: nobody
X-Time: Fri Mar 21 10:35:45 2003
X-Face: [EMAIL PROTECTED]/;Y^gTjR\T^"B'fbeuVGiyKrvbfKJl!^e|e:iu(kJ6c|QYB57LP*|t
&YlP~HF/=h:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:6Cj0kd#4]>*D,|0djf'CVlXkI,>aV4\}?d_KEqsN{Nnt7
78"OsbQ["56/!nisvyB/uA5Q.{)gm6?q.j71ww.>b9b]-sG8zNt%KkIa>xWg&1VcjZk[hBQ>]j~`Wq
Xl,y1a!(>6`UM{~'X[Y_,Bv+}=L\SS*mA8=s;!=O`ja|@PEzb&i0}Qp,`Z\:6:OmRi*
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 10:35:45 -0600
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (Matthias
Klose's message of "Fri, 28 Feb 2003 23:47:01 +0100")
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.7 required=4.0
tests=IN_REP_TO,NOSPAM_INC,REFERENCES,SIGNATURE_SHORT_DENSE,
SPAM_PHRASE_00_01,USER_AGENT,USER_AGENT_GNUS_UA,
X_AUTH_WARNING
version=2.44
X-Spam-Level:
Hi,
My stance has been that in order to be classified as common,
a license ought to be actually common -- say, a rule of thumb: be at
least used in 5% of the packages.
The rationale behind adding licenses to the common-licenses
category is to prevent excessive duplication of the license text, and
prevent useless waste of disk space; this saving in disk space is
supposed to offset the additional effort to determine what the
license is.
So, if there are at least 5% of the source packages (or
whatever number emrges from the debate that is sure to follow), we
can include the license into common license. A nice, objective
criteria for admission ;-)
manoj
--
I know it's weird, but it does make it easier to write poetry in perl.
:-) Larry Wall in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
