l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: > taylanbayi...@gmail.com (Taylan Ulrich "Bayırlı/Kammer") skribis: > >> From 051341d49fae36579ce318ab0b9c245ed084cdae Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >> From: =?UTF-8?q?Taylan=20Ulrich=20Bay=C4=B1rl=C4=B1/Kammer?= >> <taylanbayi...@gmail.com> >> Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2015 15:57:51 +0100 >> Subject: [PATCH 2/3] gnu: msea: Propagate input libxshmfence. >> >> * gnu/packages/gl.scm (mesa): Propagate input libxshmfence. > > [...] > >> + ("libxshmfence" ,libxshmfence) > > Please add a margin comment explaining the reason.
It's in the "Requires.private" field of the gl.pc pkg-config file. The same seems to be the case for other packages in the propagated-inputs list. Should it be explained for all of them?.. >> From e1f288dee780b374fc2162eb39d96a50d64964c1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >> From: =?UTF-8?q?Taylan=20Ulrich=20Bay=C4=B1rl=C4=B1/Kammer?= >> <taylanbayi...@gmail.com> >> Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2015 15:58:25 +0100 >> Subject: [PATCH 3/3] gnu: Add mesa-demos. >> >> * gnu/packages/gl.scm (mesa-demos): New variable. > > [...] > >> + ;; The package contains many source files without a license, some >> + ;; instances of the expat license, and some X11 style licenses by SGI, >> so >> + ;; we consider it to be collectively under the X11 license. > > Is there a top-level ‘LICENSE’ or ‘COPYING’ or ‘COPYRIGHT’ file? If > there is, then the intent is most likely that the files without a > license headers are covered by whatever this top-level file says. > > If there is really no indication, that would make the software non-free. Sadly, there is no such file. Debian has it as a "source package", and has a Copyright file assembled for it: http://metadata.ftp-master.debian.org/changelogs/main/m/mesa-demos/mesa-demos_8.0.1-2_copyright It builds the mesa-utils and mesa-utils-extra packages from this source package. Do we have to do something similar? Taylan