On Nov 9, 2007, at 4:33 PM, Ales Hvezda wrote: > [snip] >> I'm making up a patch to install Tomaz's mimetype icons, and don't >> know >> where best to put it. > > Are these the icons which are licensed under a GPL-incompatible > license? > What's the status of that?
Isn't GPL a strange and ambiguous license for something that isn't software? > >> I've started, by re-using the old "geda" subdir name, for a >> package of >> things which belong to the whole suite. >> > > No objections, but with the following pre-conditions: > > 1) debian allows the reuse of a package name, > 2) it would be possible to reuse the geda package name for > a front-end, should a suitable replacement ever materialize, > and > 3) all content is properly licensed under the GPL. > > > [snip] >> Should I just stick the mime-types in libgeda, (they'll end up >> installing with libgeda-common on a debian box), or should I make a >> "geda" package? > > Please check with Hamish and get his two cents. These icons > and such do not really belong in libgeda, but there might be a debian > reason why they should go into libgeda-common > > -Ales > > > > _______________________________________________ > geda-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-dev John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd. http://www.noqsi.com/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ geda-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-dev
