On 17.07.2014 20:51, Stephen Gran wrote:
Hi,
This one time, at band camp, Andreas Cadhalpun said:
Hi Stephen,
On 13.07.2014 21:49, Scott Kitterman wrote:
On Sunday, July 13, 2014 14:49:12 Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
I converted clamav's debian/copyright to the DEP-5 format and also
updated it.
But I don't know what license/copyright should be mentioned for the
debian directory. (Only the clamav-config.1 man page has an explicit
license.)
What do you think?
I would view it as under the same license as the predominate license of the
package, but sgran is probably the one that should say since it's mostly his
work.
Do you concur with Scott's view, or should debian/copyright mention
a different license (than GPL-2) for the debian directory (like
GPL-2+, under which you licensed the clamav-config.1 man page)?
I have no strong preference. GPL-2 is fine with me, but if you are
inclined towards GPL-2+, that's also ok.
Thanks for the quick answer.
I went for GPL-2+, because it's simpler if the whole debian directory
has the same license.
Best regards,
Andreas
_______________________________________________
Pkg-clamav-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-clamav-devel
