Hi, On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 11:12 PM, Michael Tautschnig <[email protected]> wrote: > It is, yes! I didn't even have to spot it myself, licensecheck did :-) > Well, licensecheck told me that there was MIT-licensed code in > this folder, which made me take a closer look.
> In fact, your debian/copyright file will have to reflect this as > well: Even though you don't use it anymore, the license of these > files should still be noted in there. Ok, I didn't know about licensecheck before. Handy stuff: the copyright statements in the source code files are GPL-2+, even if the LICENSE.txt in the root of source is GPL-3. I corrected the debian/copyright accordingly, and (kindly) asked the upstream author to make up his mind before the next release. > I did't do much checking to see where you got it from, but you might > want to update the debian/watch file as well. Actually I believe the debian/watch should work as it is. That is my first debian/watch file, though, so I'd like to ask you to double check it if there is not too much trouble. The upstream source CMake scripts have a bug: the source doesn't compile without the .svn directories. So, in the first version I used 'svn checkout' to download the source instead of 'svn export'. In current version the source tree is clean, and I patched the CMake scripts to work without .svn dirs (and informed the upstream author). AFAIK the watch file is still tracking the next tagged release. > Sure, that's ok. But I'm pretty sure the next version (with a fixed > copyright file and possibly an updated debian/watch file) is ready > to be uploaded, so please switch over to your desired final version. Wow, that was easier than I expected. The version 0.9.2-1 is now uploaded in mentors.d.n. I cleaned the 0.9.2-1~n versions away from the changelog. King regards, Pekko -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
